Proposed for World Bank Financing

GEORGIA FORESTS DEVELOPMENT PROJECT PROPOSED FOR WORLD BANK FINANCING

SOCIAL ASSESSMENT

Report by Georgian Opinion Research Business International for the Government of Georgia

Tbilisi

May 12, 2000 The Government of Japan has provided funding for this study to the Government of Georgia through a Policy and Human Resources Development (PHRD) grant administered by the World Bank (Grant JPN 25144-GE).

The publication of the report was made possible with financial and technical assistance of the Global Alliance for Forest Conservation and Sustainable Use (World Bank - World Wide Fund for Nature).

The Forestry Development Fund commissioned the study on behalf of the Government of Georgia. Additional copies of the report can be requested at the Fund’s address at: Mindeli Street 9, Tbilisi, 380086, Georgia, tel./fax (+995-32) 320549.

Comments on the report can be sent by electronic mail to: Mr. Merab Pachulia at Georgian Opinion Research Business International ([email protected]), Ms. Ketevan Metreveli at the Forestry Development Fund ([email protected]) and Mr. Andrey Kushlin at the World Bank ([email protected]).

2 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgements ? Executive Summary ? Introduction and Background ? Social Assessment Objectives and Methodology ? Key Findings ? Implications of Social Assessment for Project Design and Implementation ? Monitoring and Evaluation ?

Annex 1: List of Interviews by Profession ? Annex 2: Suggested Public Participation Activities ? Annex 3: Forest Related Non-Governmental Organizations ? Annex 4: Map of Georgia and Survey Area ? Annex 5: Statistical Data Figures ?

ABBREVIATIONS

GOG: Government of Georgia GFDP: Georgia Forest Development Project NGO: Non-Governmental Organization SA: Social Assessment

3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The study was conducted by a team of sociologists including ??? (project leader), ??? (affiliation), ??? (affiliation), ??? (affiliation) and ??? (affiliation). Surveys and focus groups were organized and carried out by ??? (affiliation), ??? (affiliation), ??? (affiliation) and ??? (affiliation).

The study team wishes to express its sincere appreciation to Ms. Janis Bernstein, World Bank’s Sociologist, for her professional guidance in the design, methodology, planning, implementation and quality review of the study. The report benefited greatly from the review and detailed comments received from Mr. Merab Dvali and Ms. Ketevan Metreveli (Georgian State Department of Forest Management), ??? (affiliation), ??? (affiliation), ??? (affiliation), ??? (affiliation), Ms. Manana Kochladze (The Greens Movement of Georgia) and Mr. Andrey Kushlin (World Bank). Mr. Peter Gordon (World Bank) provided assistance with finalization of the report’s executive summary.

The study team greatly acknowledges the critical assistance from Mr. Georgi Sanadiradze, Mr. Nugzar Zazanashvili, Mr. ?? and Ms. ?? (Georgia Program Office of the World Wide Fund for Nature) in the preparation of this report for publication.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

i. Georgia’s forests and the resources within them have a significant influence on the country’s agricultural development, economy, governance, and culture. The Government of Georgia (GOG), therefore, has assigned top priority to addressing the opportunities and challenges posed by the country’s substantial forest and related resources. In 1997, the Government prepared its National Forest Strategy, which is the result of two years of study and consensus-building among important stakeholders. In June 1999, it enacted “The Forest Code of Georgia,” which establishes a legal framework and long range plan to transition its forests to market principles while safeguarding their critical environmental, social, and cultural values. ii. As part of its efforts to improve the management of forests, the GOG requested World Bank assistance in preparing and financing the Georgia Forests Development Project. This assistance will be provided in parallel with the Georgia Protected Areas Development Project that is proposed to be financed by the Global Environment Facility (GEF) through the World Bank. The main objective of the proposed Georgia Forests Development Project (GFDP) is to establish sound forest management systems that would maximize the contribution of Georgia’s forests to economic development and rural poverty reduction on an environmentally sustainable basis. To achieve this objective, the following measures must be taken:  Contribute to forest policy analysis and strategy planning  Support the existing National Forest Policy and strategy improvement

4  Establish a fForest management information system and contribute to providing improved qualification and training of new workers of the State Forestry Department and subordinate municipal staff  Reconstruction of forest sector and contribute to improved institutional control; conduct research, educational, and public-awareness programs  Contribute to the development of the private sector in order to increase the sector’s involvement in fForest management and forest resource use  Contribute to allocating forestry funds into protected areas and economic zones, develop appropriate plans and support sustainable forest use  Support the State Forest Fund’s health protection measures  In order to support reforestation and afforestation activities, contribute to the activities of the creation and production of seeds of the best genetic quality and plant reproduction development  Formulate a precise account of forest resources in target areas and develop plans for “model” land use and forest management  Provide the implementation of proposed reforestation and replanting programs  Contribute to the improvement of forest production and transportation activities by providing opportunities for implementation and demonstration of new techniques and technologies and training staff  Provide implementation of measures on rehabilitation and improvement of forest roads, as proposed by the project.  Increase incomes from non-wood forest products and promote commercial hunting and ecotourism activities  Provide the participation of the population and publicity regarding the importance of forest ecosystems and the preservation of forest biodiversity iii. Achieving these objectives will yield a sound forest management system that maximizes the contribution of Georgia’s forests to economic development and rural poverty reduction on an environmentally sustainable basis. As part of the preparation of the GFDP, the Georgian Forestry Development Fund acting on behalf of the GOG, with the assistance of a project preparation grant received from the Government of Japan through the World Bank, hired Georgian Opinion Research Business International (GORBI) to carry out an independent Social Assessment (SA) of the proposed project. This report presents the findings of this assessment and their implications for project design and implementation.

Social Assessment Objectives and Methodology iv. The main objective of the SA is to ensure that the GFDP contributes to poverty alleviation, enhances inclusion, increases social capital, builds ownership by key stakeholders, eliminates or least mitigates any adverse social impacts that may result from the projects, and establishes a basis for social monitoring and evaluation. Its specific objectives are to: identify important stakeholders in the forest sector, clarify their interests, and examine the relationships between stakeholder groups; assess the consequences of stakeholder interests and relationships on sustainable forest management; recommend changes that could be made to re-direct the funds and attention of various stakeholders to promote sustainable practices; and provide recommendations for raising public awareness about the need for improved forest management,

5 and for ensuring appropriate levels of public participation related to sustainable forestry and improved forest management. The SA team applied a combination of quantitative and qualitative SA methods, including a survey of 600 households, 10 focus group discussions, 75 semi-structured interviews of government officials and NGO representatives, in-situ observation, and a review of secondary sources of information. These tools were implemented in the Georgian Central Caucasus provinces of Racha (Oni and Ambrolauri Districts), Svaneti (Lentekhi District) and Lechkhumi (Tsageri District).

Key Findings

v. The following present the main findings of the SA. They address the main stakeholders, important social development issues, institutional and organizational dimensions, implications for project design and implementation, and recommendations on indicators for project monitoring and evaluating project performance in the course of project implementation.

Main Stakeholders and Potential Conflicts

vi. Four key stakeholders will affect the planning, implementation, and monitoring of the GFDP – the general population, forest management districts (leskhozes), non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and government agencies associated with forest sector management. vii. General Population. This group comprises three distinct economic groups with differing interests: (a) the poorest households who cannot afford to purchase either food or clothes (25 percent of households who spend 9 – 55 laris monthly); the “middle poor” who can afford to buy food but not clothes (25 percent of households that spend 55 – 145 laris monthly); and the “least poor” who can afford with difficulty to buy both food and clothes (50 percent of households that spend 145 – 235 laris monthly). The amount of forest wood cut by each group decreases as income increases. viii. The degree of poverty largely determines the need to cut wood for heating and cooking needs. Oni and Lentekhi Districts have the greatest proportion of the poorest households and depend on forest resources most for heating and cooking. The least poor households are most likely to use, or desire to use, alternative heating and cooking fuels such as kerosene, gasoline, or electricity. Tsageri District has the greatest proportion of these households. The general population is largely unaware of forest management issues but they see excessive cutting of trees as undesirable and generally support restrictions on wood cutting.

ix. NGO Community. Environmental organizations such as the Green Party and the World Wildlife Fund dominate the NGO community. Their presence in local communities throughout Georgia is thin, but they aggressively advocate preservation interests and are most critical of government efforts and distrusting of its intentions. They have limited influence with the general population and even less influence with government agencies.

x. National Forest management Agencies. Despite positive views of the new Forest Code, there is no consensus among or within the various forest management agencies on critical policy issues. Budget shortfalls, lack of coordination, over-centralization, lack of credible forest

6 management data, and many competing interests compound Government’s difficulties. Consequently, there is relatively no action on these issues as a result.

xi. Forest Management Districts. There are 54 forest management districts (leskhozes), three parks, three large and some small plantation farms in Georgia. Forest management districts cover on average between 20,000 and 100,000 hectares of forest land each. xii. Potential Stakeholder Conflicts. The principal conflicts among stakeholders will center on enforcement of existing laws and the extent to which the Government supports business interests over preservation. The poorest and middle poor are most likely to resist restrictions on forest use, particularly in Oni District, and are likely to be the most difficult to influence because they are least informed. Their adoption of alternative fuels could lessen resistance considerably. Local forestry departments may be more interested in the financial benefits of forest management than in environmental stewardship. Environmental NGOs and commercial loggers will likely represent the two extreme positions on the forest management political spectrum. If this becomes reality, GFDP project managers should listen to them to gain their considerable expertise but place their agendas secondary to the interests of the general population and forests.

Important Social Development Issues xiii. Georgia must address the following key social development issues to reduce poverty, improve forest health, and strengthen social structures. xiv. Forest Degradation. Although credible statistics do not exist, the general population and environmental NGOs generally perceive that forests are deteriorating relatively quickly. They blame excessive fire wood cutting (65 percent), climate changes (10 percent), pollution (4.4 percent), and human encroachment (4 percent). While residents in Tsageri are most alarmed by this situation, Oni residents are the least concerned. Forest deterioration in turn is causing serious erosion, mudslides, and avalanches. xv. Poverty and the Energy Crisis. Poverty (unemployment and income) dominate concerns of the general population. About 50 percent of the sample cannot afford to buy both food and clothing. The respondents from most of the remaining households reported that they can barely afford basic necessities and that subsistence agriculture ensures their survival. Poverty is the root cause of forest degradation because it forces two thirds of the population to cut wood for heating, cooking, and earning cash income. Alternative energy for heating and cooking, such as kerosene, natural gas or electricity, is either unavailable or too expensive. Those with more income cut less wood and use more alternatives. xvi. Government Inaction. NGOs and 80 percent of the general population attribute government inaction or inefficiency for the country’s worsening forest conditions. Fifty-one percent of the respondents believe that the Government should restrict use of forest resources while 30 percent prefer making alternative energy more available. Most people are not aware of the Forest Code but believe that weak law enforcement is a major problem. Inadequate budgetary resources and authority prevent local departments from hiring and training people and buying the equipment needed to enforce laws adequately. Inadequate government wages and the

7 population’s dependence on wood cutting encourages corruption and lax enforcement. Lack of government coordination dilutes the effectiveness of inadequate resources further. xvii. The public’s lack of awareness of forest-related laws also contributes to illegal wood cutting. Trade restrictions on wood may hurt forest resources more than they help by creating black markets and depriving forest management departments of much-needed revenue. Inadequate roads hamper forest management and costs the economy jobs and incomes with which people could purchase alternative fuels. xviii. Health. More than a third of the population reports that the health of family members has deteriorated and seven percent believe it is one of the top problems their villages face. The problem is most severe in Oni and Tsageri. Of those with health problems, two thirds blame the physical and emotional stress of poverty; only seven percent blame deteriorating healthcare services.

xix. Lack of Credit. The lack of credit precludes opportunities for many people, including the 26 percent of the population that wants to start their own business, to increase their income. Only two percent of the sample reported using credit in the previous 12 months. Lack of credit contributes to poverty which, in turn, is the principal cause of forest deterioration.

xx. Out-Migration. Due to economic blight, at least one family member in about 45 percent of the households leaves the village. Two thirds of these households do not expect these family members to return. Youth are most likely to leave their villages, depriving both families and communities of the energy and strength needed to cut and collect fuelwood and to farm. Out- migration is slowing economic growth and imposing more physical and emotional stress on the elderly. However, remittance income is helping many families to survive.

xxi. Inadequate Awareness and Public Participation. The population is isolated, constrained economically, and distrusting due to lack of information; lack of participation in government policy-making, forestry activities and social activities; and lack of access to critical resources. The people’s isolation and distrust greatly limits government ability to manage forest resources properly. As discussed below, the Government can improve its capacity to engage the public and NGOs.

(a) Lack of Information. Twenty-two percent of the population reported that they do not receive any information about forest resources (50 percent in Lentekhi), while a little more than half (55 percent) are dissatisfied with forestry-related information. People trust television the most for information, and they overwhelmingly depend on this medium. Government attempts to influence people will be challenged not only by the difficulty in reaching them, but the tendency of the public not to believe the information they receive.

(b) Lack of Participation. Two-thirds of the population believe the public should participate in forest management activities. However, 80 percent have not done so due to lack of opportunities or direction. Government can greatly improve its capacity to manage forest resources by engaging the public and NGOs, gaining their trust, and guiding their contributions.

8 (c) Insufficient knowledge. The population lacks employment and income because it is socially and economically isolated. Twenty-six percent have ambitions to start new businesses (more than half of which would help improve forest health), but they lack access to transportation, credit, and marketing knowledge and facilities. Most support restricted wood-cutting, but privatizing forests or making them national parks without availing alternative energy could invite social disaster, particularly among the poor. The population depends overwhelmingly on state lands for wood, grazing, and gathering food.

Institutional and Organizational Dimensions xxii. Government and the public lack the institutions to address key social development issues. The public lacks the institutions to generate income/employment; generate energy; or gather, channel, and assess information. These weaknesses burden the Government, which also lacks the institutional capacity to address poverty and manage forests. xxiii. Weak Government Organization. Government deficiencies cover: (a) lack of coordination capacity; (b) over-centralization; (c) inadequate management information systems (MIS), (d) deficient communication with the public; (e) weak staffing due to inadequate numbers of foresters in the field, low pay or late pay, and insufficient training; and (f) weak administration of wood-cutting licenses. (Note: according to new rules the licenses for forest use are provided by the State Forestry Department) xxiv. Lack of Social Infrastructure and Civic Institutions. Deficiencies in social infrastructure and civil society isolate the population from the Government, forest management activities, and other people. They lack institutions and physical facilities to obtain information, participate in forest management activities, store and market agricultural and livestock products, learn about and obtain alternative energy, obtain credit, or attend educational programs/classes.

Implications of SA for Project Design and Implementation xxv. The SA recommends that the GFDP and the GOG address the deteriorating health of forests by reducing the population’s appetite for fuel wood while improving people’s social and economic needs. The following recommendations should be considered by the Government in project design and implementation.

Improve Government Enforcement xxvi. Current law enforcement is insufficient The Government should: (a) improve the coverage and effectiveness of all forestry officials, particularly those in local departments; (b) augment forest management by forestry officials with the direct help of the general population and NGOs; and (c) increase the penalties for violating forestry regulations, particularly wood- cutting restrictions.

9 Increase Employment and Income Generating Opportunities xxvii. The incentives to adopt alternative heating and cooking fuels must be supported with increased opportunities of employment and income. Households are more likely to switch from wood-cutting to alternative fuel supplies if they can afford to do so. Three broad measures would support this objective: (a) improving access of citizens to available resources; (b) targeting lending and technical assistance to small businesses whose activities support sound forest management; and (c) educating commercial loggers and those who cut wood for sale on how to profit from healthy, sustainable management of forest resources.

Improve Government Policy-Making and Implementation xxviii. The Government has great potential to improve its ability to manage forest resources and simultaneously nurture social development and economic growth. It can do so by: (a) incorporating the general population, NGOs and commercial structures into policy discussions, decisions, reviews, implementation and monitoring; (b) clearly defining sustainable forest development and developing appropriate policies to support it; (c) assigning clear roles and responsibilities to each of the agencies responsible for implementing policies; (d) improving the capacity to coordinate the newly clarified roles of these agencies to meet newly clarified sustainable forest development objectives; (e) decentralizing forest management activities, including budgeting and administration, while increasing local accountability; (f) upgrading management information system capabilities to support greater decentralization and coordination needs; (g) improving dissemination and receipt of information to and from the stakeholders; and (h) improving human resources in terms of salaries, training, and numbers of employees.

Involve Communities in Forest Management

xxix. Forestry departments, particularly at local levels, are understaffed. Too few forestry officials must oversee too many trees. Simultaneously, households do not participate enough in government policy-making and forest management. To combat both these problems, forestry departments should actively engage the population in forest management and related activities. The SA recommends that: (a) forestry officials establish training, educational and public awareness programs in integrated forest management for households; (b) villages and communities establish public forest management clubs or organizations under the guidance of local forestry departments, NGOs and local leaders; (c) the forest management clubs provide incentives to members for helping forestry department officials and NGOs manage forest resources; and (d) national forestry departments and local village leaders establish a means for citizens to anonymously and conveniently report forest code violators as well as instances of official corruption.

Raise Public Awareness of Forestry Issues

xxx. The training, educational, and public awareness programs should include information campaigns, forest management and preservation promotions, and community education as well as and other socially-oriented activities that raise awareness and educate the public about forest management and related forestry issues. Specific groups should be targeted with these programs:

10 women, the youth, the elderly, and the poorest, as well as community leaders, ecopolice, educators, the media and business owners.

(a) Women. The SA found that women are likely to respond best to information that appeals to their interest in the traditional and local significance of forests and forest resources (rather than forestry interests in general). Such themes could include the local importance of native plants such as herbs, memories of community or family activities in the more pristine forests of the past, and the historical and religious significance of the region’s natural attributes. Engaging women’s interest with these subjects will lay the groundwork for more explicitly addressing forest management issues. Printed materials such as brochures, calendars or posters are the best media for reaching women.

(b) Youth. Young people under 20 years old living in or adjacent forests are likely to respond best to information that appeals to their interest in the unavailability or expense of fuel alternatives, employment opportunities associated with proper forest management, and commercial sector development components of the GFPD such as how sustainable forest utilization can be profitable. Radio and television are the best media to reach youth.

(c) Villagers older than 50 years. This group is most likely to respond best to information about general forestry issues such as the traditional importance of local natural resources, the long- term benefits of forest preservation, and the financial benefits of sustainable forest utilization to local economies (such as employment, infrastructure and municipal services). Radio and print media such as newspapers would be most effective in reaching this group.

(d) Poor. Those too poor to afford alternative fuels are critical to target because they are most likely to fell fuel wood, are least informed, and are least likely to participate in forest management. They should be targeted with information that appeals to their interest in economic and employment opportunities in sustainable forest management and development and the importance of forest resources to wildlife and hunting.

xxxi. Forest management clubs should entice households with incentives to join the clubs and participate in forest management. Such incentives might include priority consideration in receiving municipal services, or even discounts on alternative fuel supplies and equipment. Club managers must ensure that members participate actively and cooperatively with government foresters and NGOs in forest management activities.

Protect the Most Vulnerable xxxii. The campaign against excessive wood-cutting could hurt those who depend on forest resources the most. These people include the poorest, women, the elderly, youth, and the residents of Oni and Lentekhi. The recommendations above – especially the information/education campaigns, making government more transparent and responsive to citizens, improvements in forest management practices, and implementing additional studies – help or accommodate the needs of the poorest and most vulnerable. Managers of all initiatives should carefully consider during planning stages the effect of their programs on these groups.

11 Study Additional Issues xxxiii. Further studies will greatly help the Government to identify issues, develop solutions, obtain stakeholder consensus, and implement appropriate measures. Such studies should at a minimum focus on the balance of supply and demand for wood resources, alternative fuel use, the negative social and economic effects of environmental damage, the effects of trade restrictions on wood, and transportation issues.

Recognize Regional Differences in Project Implementation xxxiv. The findings of the SA indicate that there are significant differences among the populations of Tsageri, Ambrolauri, Lentekhi and Oni with respect to their social and economic conditions as well as their perspectives on forest resources and their management. GFDP managers, therefore, should take these differences into account during project implementation and phase in the recommendations. For example, initially, GFDP managers may first want to tackle those geographic areas that are most receptive to the recommendations and target an information/educational program to those which are less receptive. As lessons are learned from the initial phase, they could be applied to programs for those areas that were initially less receptive but which have become more knowledgeable due to the initial information campaigns.

Monitoring and Evaluation xxxv. The GFDP covers a relatively narrow sector but must address a broad range of assets and issues – from energy and roads to integrated forest management to the complexities of poverty. The proposed program is expected to provide long-term, continuous and adaptable support for forest resource management. Therefore, the results of the initial phases of the program must be recorded, assessed, and used to develop additional solutions to problems. Specific output and impact indicators of the project’s progress will be monitored and evaluated. Bank staff, GOG officials, NGOs, commercial interests and local populations should work together to assess indicators and develop these solutions regularly.

GEORGIA FORESTS DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

SOCIAL ASSESSMENT

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

The Government of Georgia (GOG) has assigned top priority to addressing opportunities and challenges posed by the country’s forests and related resources which have an important influence on the country’s economy, governance, and culture. In 1997, the Government prepared its National Forest Strategy after two years of study and consensus building among important stakeholders. In June 1999, it enacted “The Forest Code of Georgia,” which establishes a legal framework and long range plan to transition its forests to market principles while safeguarding their critical environmental, social, and cultural values.

12 In its efforts to improve the management of forests, the GOG requested World Bank assistance in preparing and financing the Georgia Forests Development Project. This assistance will be provided in parallel with the Georgia Protected Areas Development Project that is proposed to be financed by the Global Environment Facility (GEF) through the World Bank. The main objective of the proposed Georgia Forests Development Project (GFDP) is to establish sound forest management systems that would maximize the contribution of Georgia’s forests to economic development and rural poverty reduction on an environmentally sustainable basis. . As part of the preparation of the GFDP, the Georgian Forestry Development Fund acting on behalf of the GOG with the assistance of a project preparation grant received from the Government of Japan through the World Bank, hired Georgian Opinion Research Business International (GORBI) to carry out an independent Social Assessment (SA) during the period of September to December 1999 to identify important social factors that would need to be taken into account in project design and implementation, as well as to ensure appropriate levels of stakeholder participation.

The purpose of this report is to present the findings of the assessment and their implications for project design and implementation. The remainder of chapter 1 presents a background on the country’s macroeconomic conditions, the forest sector, and the objectives and methodology used in carrying out the assessment. Chapter 2 presents the main findings of the assessment, and chapter 3 presents their implications for project design and implementation. Chapter 4 presents a framework for public participation in the project. Finally, chapter 5 suggests indicators for monitoring and evaluating project performance.

Economic Conditions

Georgia has made significant progress in improving its macroeconomic environment since the early- and mid-1990s. Real income has grown substantially and consistently, inflation has decreased markedly, government budget deficits have declined, the exchange rate has held steady against the US dollar and other major currencies, but trade deficits continue to be large at nearly seven percent of GDP. Real rates of interest and unemployment are not available. Table 1 details major macroeconomic indices over the last five years.

Table 1: Economic Indicators Actual Est. Projected 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Nominal GDP (US$ mil.) 2,886 4,572 5,242 5,966 6,600 7,233 Real Per Capita GDP Growth 2.6% 11.5% 10.9% 9.8% 4.8% 7.8% Inflation (CPI) 162.7%* 39.4% 7.1% 10.6% 20% 4.5% Trade Deficit (US$ mil.) -$337 -$293 -$484 -$534 -$464 -$500 Exchange Rate (to US$) 1.28 1.252 1.297 1.73# 2.1 - Government Deficit (% GDP) -7.2% -5.8% -4.5% -4.3% -1.9% -1.6% 1990 – 1995 period # Exchange rate in December

13 The Russian economic crisis of August 1998 had a profound impact on Georgia’s economy. Before the crisis, the economy was growing at an annual rate of six percent, inflation was at 0.5 percent and exports were growing. After Russia’s crisis, GDP fell one to two percent, monthly inflation ballooned to 12.1 percent and totaled 10.6 percent for the year, and government reserves fell to four weeks of imports as GOG permitted the lari to depreciate to about 1.73. Tax revenue declined 22 percent below target while government expenditure increased considerably. In 1999 annual GDP growth fell to less than five percent and the currency continued to depreciate.

The extent to which the crisis was mitigated was due to tightened money supply, permitting the currency to move freely, selling the state electricity company Telasi to private investors and facilitating the liquidity of major banks. Stagnation of industrial and agricultural output was offset by growth in construction, transport and telecommunications. In addition, GOG continued its priority to improve collection of taxes to strengthen its ability to deliver services, reduce its budget deficits, and to support the exchange rate. However, tax collection rates remain below targets.

GOG is currently attempting to improve a host of government functions, including implementation of cigarette taxes, oil transit profit fees, collection of back-taxes, harmonizing import taxes, balancing the government budget, cutting business regulations and improving prudential management. It will attempt to reduce fiscal expenditures but make priorities of paying wages, pensions, social expenditures, and interest payments.

Forest Sector

Georgia’s 400 species of trees cover about 2.8 million hectares of land (more than 40 percent of Georgia). Deciduous trees (beech, Georgian and high mountain oak, hornbeam, chestnut, ash and maple) comprise about 80 percent of forests while conifers (silver fir, east fir and Sosnowsky pines) cover the remaining 20 percent of forest area. Today Georgian forests constitute state property and they cover 2.25 million hectares. Ninety-eight percent of these forests are located on the bio-diversity rich Caucasus Mountains, with about 75 percent in elevations above 500 meters. About 500,000 hectares of forests in Great and Minor Caucasus is virgin forest due to complicated topography and restricted access. Total timber stock in these forests according to one estimate, which may be high, is about 420 million cubic meters.

Georgia’s climate and soils are ideal for growth and development of forests. However, forest depletion has outpaced new growth for much of the 20th century, endangering some of these critical natural resources. Intensive industrial cutting from the 1930s to the 1950s degraded more than half of the country’s forest areas. About 500,000 hectares of highly productive forest stock were lost during this period. Later during the Soviet period, forests were managed for protection and recreation as timber and timber products were imported from the Russian Republic. Although reliable data are scarce, the forest sector used to contribute four to five percent of Georgia’s GDP, but may contribute significantly less now. Since the mid-1970s, timber production may have decreased about 90 percent.

14 According to the Eco-Police Department, there is about 3.42 million cubic meters of wood in the country, and according to the State Department of Forestry this amount is 4.34 million cubic meters. The average stock may now be about 300 cubic meters per hectare, although some locations could have timber stock as high as 2,800 cubic meters per hectare. Average growth may range between 10 and 15 cubic meters per hectare. An estimated 500,000 families are each consuming between five to 25 cubic meters of firewood annually according to independent reports. However, according to officials in the Eco-Police Department, only about two million cubic meters are needed annually to satisfy local needs, a rate according to the State Department of Forestry that would exhaust existing resources in 170 years. After independence from Russia, Georgia lost most of its imported wood supply, which accounted for 85 percent of its requirements.

CHAPTER 2: SOCIAL ASSESSMENT OBJECTIVES AND METHODOLOGY

The overall objective of this Social Assessment (SA) is to ensure that the Georgia Forests Development Project contributes to poverty alleviation, builds participation and “ownership” in the project by the affected population and key stakeholders, and does not adversely impact the general population. To achieve this overall objective, the SA focused on three provinces – Racha (Oni and Ambrolauri), Svaneti (Lentekhi) and Lechkhumi (Tsageri) – and sought to identify stakeholders in the forest sector, determine their particular interests, clarify relationships between them, and assess the consequences of stakeholder interests on sustainable forest management.

The areas of study were primarily the forests of Racha, (lower) Svaneti and Lechkhumi provinces. In Racha, the total area in the Ambrolauri district has about 76,000 73,019 hectares of forest, half of which comprises beech and oak trees. The Oni district has 63,272 hectares of forests. Ninety-nine percent of Oni’s forests are natural and composed of beech (about 50 percent), oak (about 13 percent), fir (about 21 percent) and conifers (abut five percent). Average annual growth there is about two to 2 square meters of trees per hectare, or about 23,400 square meters of new area, while annual wood consumption is between 20,000 to 25,000 cubic meters. In the lower Svaneti, the Lentekhi territory covers 134,400 hectares but has 83,000 hectares of forest (58 percent of area), of which 45 percent are beech and 18 percent are conifer. Lechkhumi province has 47,000 hectares of forests, which are almost completely deciduous.

The SA used a combination of quantitative surveys, focus groups, semi-structured interviews, in-situ observation and secondary information to achieve these objectives. Each succeeding research method clarified and reinforced the findings of preceding methods. Secondary research occurred throughout 1999. The focus group sessions were held in September 1999 utilizing knowledge gained from the secondary research. In October 1999 the SA Team conducted the quantitative surveys utilizing the analysis and findings of the secondary research and focus group sessions. Semi-structured interviews were also conducted in October and used to help explain the quantitative data. The combination of research methods ensures that the SA’s findings are objective and based on sound analysis and interpretation of data.

The quantitative survey was administered to 600 households in Racha, Svaneti and Lechkhumi. The questions were designed to establish basic background information, such as

15 education levels, economic and employment situations, etc., as well as to obtain data on how the households used and obtained fuel, including which types and what quantities of fuel, to determine household involvement in the agricultural and forest sectors, and to establish levels of interest and knowledge in various forest-related issues. In addition, the questionnaire sought the respondents’ opinions and attitudes about forest conditions and life in forested municipal settlements.

All interviewers were thoroughly trained on how to appropriately select respondents according to established sample guidelines, how to administer the questionnaires in a neutral and unbiased fashion, and how to record responses accurately and literally. Responses were computer coded. Twenty percent of them were checked to assure validity. Typically, this method of quality control was performed in person (many respondents did not have telephones) and aimed to verify key responses such as name, number of individuals living in the household, and to gain the respondent’s acknowledgement of recorded answers to at least three survey questions. If any significant discrepancies arose among a particular interviewer’s caseload, that interviewer’s entire sample was discarded from the database and their survey area was re-canvassed. Complete data received through this survey appears in Appendix 1.

A total of 75 in-depth, semi-structured interviews were performed with individuals who work in, with, and on Georgian forests. These interviewees included State Forestry Department representatives, academicians, environmentalists, scientists, business people, foresters and forest protectors. The questionnaires used in the semi-structured interviews were designed to gain insight into forest conditions, as well as into the reality of working with Georgian forests. In particular, the questionnaires sought to establish specific issues and problems that the respondents thought significant. A description of those interviewed appears in Appendix 2).

The SA Team held 10 focus group sessions in Oni and Tsageri in September 1999. One focus group comprised 11 representatives of NGOs, one comprised 11 employees of state and education institutes, and eight comprised individuals among the general population (see Appendix 2 for a list of state and NGO participants). Each of the 10 focus groups had about 10 participants (102 people participated). Two of the Oni and Tsageri focus groups were composed entirely of women, and two were composed of entirely men. The four remaining focus groups of the general population comprised men and women of various ages and professions All focus group sessions utilized either video or audio equipment to ensure response accuracy. The focus group guides aimed to discern forest conditions, as well as the concerns of the local inhabitants and the individuals working with the forests.

16 CHAPTER 3: KEY FINDINGS

The SA identified four key stakeholders who will impact the planning, implementation and monitoring of the GFDP -- the general population, forest management districts, non- governmental organizations (NGOs), and government agencies charged with a variety of forest- related responsibilities. These major interests are both competing and working together to develop solutions to what many perceive are increasingly deteriorating forest resources.

There are several key social development issues that will shape their interactions and challenge potential popular welfare and forest management solutions. Ongoing degradation of Georgian forests, poverty and subsistence living, an energy crisis of energy, excessive tree cutting, declining healthcare, inadequate roads, out-migration and a dearth of credit services are all challenging Georgia’s society and government. Simultaneously, GOG’s incapacity and resulting inaction on several important issues compounds the difficulties in managing these social development issues.

A critical aspect to addressing these challenges is the extent to which the general population is able to participate in government deliberations and forest management programs, as well as actively manage forest management in conjunction with government agencies and NGOs. A second critical aspect is the extent to which GOG, NGOs, commercial interests and the general population can develop institutional and organizational capacities to nurture greater popular participation throughout society and to identify and address key social development issues. These dynamics are considered below.

Stakeholders

The GFDP has four major stakeholders – the general population, forest management districts interested in managing forest resources for profit, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) interested in maintaining and nurturing forests, and government agencies charged with a variety of forest-related responsibilities. The subsections below describe the social, economic and political perspectives of these stakeholders toward forests, their interests and responsibilities, and their capacity to affect Georgia’s forests and the specific project.

General Population

Each Georgian family consumes five to 25 cubic meters of firewood each year, depending on its location. Due to low income, unemployment and the energy crisis, nearly all residents in the study areas cut wood from nearby forests. A variety of factors impact how much and how often families cull forest for wood, but expenditure levels are the most important determinants. Expenditure levels define three major stakeholders among the general population:1

(a) Those that cannot afford to buy food or clothes (the poorest);

(b) Those that can usually afford to buy food but often cannot afford to buy clothes (the middle poor); and

1 The SA found only one person that could afford to purchase expensive items such as TVs, VCRs, etc.

17 (c) Those that can afford to buy both food and clothes (the least poor).

The character of the SA survey and those participating in it precludes defining these groups precisely with expenditure or income data. Data for both income and expenditure exhibited high standard deviations and, therefore, are very imprecise measures of these groups. Expenditure levels of each of the study areas also vary greatly. Thus we chose to segment the general population by these three standards of living because this framework: (a) encapsulates both income levels and expenditure levels; (b) best correlates with expenditure and income data; and (c) given the weakness in the income and expenditure data, best represents true standards of living.

Despite the imprecision of the data, the SA survey does suggest some expenditure ranges for each of these groups.2 About 25 percent of the sample cannot afford to buy either food or clothes (the poorest). Their monthly expenditures most often range from nine to 55 laris (US$5 – 29) a month and average 32 laris (US$17). The next economic segment – those that can afford to buy foot but often cannot buy clothes (the middle poor) – also comprises about 25 percent of the population. Their monthly expenditures range from 55 to 145 laris (US$29 - 76) and average 100 laris (US$52). The least poor households -- that are able to buy both food and clothes -- comprise the remainder of the sample. Their monthly expenditures range from 145 – 235 laris (US$76 - $123) and average 190 laris (US$99).

Differences in expenditure also define two major stakeholders among the general population: Those that cut wood for fuel; and (b) those that cut wood to sell for income. These two sets of groups overlap substantially. The poorest usually are cutting wood to use as fuel for heat, cooking and other activities. The middle poor are more likely to cut wood to sell for income. Those with the least constraints on expenditure cut and sell wood the least.

The very poorest households that are unable to buy food or clothing are more likely to reside in Oni and Lentekhi, more often cite unemployment, low income, and poor transportation as major problems. Their dependence on forest resources is greatest and, therefore, they are likely to resist restrictions of forest use. Income, employment and transportation programs would interest this group more than credit programs. They are more likely to blame declines in agricultural production on bad weather than on poor economic conditions. The very poorest households are less informed than other groups, posing a greater challenge in law enforcement and program development.

Households that are cutting wood for sale usually earn more income and are more able to afford food but still cannot often afford to purchase clothes. These types of households are more prevalent in Tsageri and are rare in Ambrolauri. They are more likely to have experienced declines in agricultural production, which they blame mostly on poor economic conditions. They are better informed about forestry issues, more critical of GOG’s forest management, and tend to be more discontented about overall living conditions. This group is more entrepreneurial and would be more

2 Expenditure level is more reliable than income as an indicator of standard of living because households are better able to track and estimate expenditures, especially those that are most poor.

18 interested in credit and small business programs. Their likely business activities (beekeeping and nurseries) would help improve forestry conditions.

The least poor households are least likely to cut wood but those that do are more likely to sell and buy it than any other group. They are least dependent of the three major groups on forest resources but they still depend heavily on the forestry for fuel wood – some are more likely to purchase it from others rather than cut it themselves. Like the other groups, their biggest problems are income and unemployment, but they are more likely to also mention inadequate electricity supplies and healthcare. They are less affected by restrictions on forestry use and would most easily switch to alternative fuel supplies for heating and cooking. Their switch to alternative fuel supplies could decrease the purchase price of fuel wood and, therefore, hurt those that cut wood to sell it. The least poor households are more likely to reside in Tsageri and not in Ambrolauri. This group is most informed about forest management issues and, therefore, could serve as a popular barometer on new forest policies, practices and programs.

Views of forestry conditions change depending on which district a person lives in. Most of Oni’s residents consider the woods there to be in good condition and about 43 percent felt that overall forest conditions had remained the same for the past 5 years. Most Oni focus group participants stated that forests are actually increasing in size and even overtaking pastures. Foresters, youth and women who have close contract with Oni forests all reported evidence of natural afforestation in Oni. One woman reported that open fields she had played in as a child were now heavily wooded with trees.

Tsageri residents feel that their forests have been damaged badly and 80 percent believe conditions are worsening. Its focus groups feel forestry conditions are critical due to massive scale timber cuts and lack of afforestation programs. One woman reported that wooded sites she had picnicked in with her family as a child were now windswept and bare. High winds and landslides have significantly increased in the Tsageri district and the participants blamed forest felling.

Generally, members of the population are uninformed about forest management issues and GOG’s attempts to solve them. Therefore, consensus on the government’s role in forest management does not exist.

Forest Management Districts

The State Forestry Department manages about 2,75 million hectares of forest in its 54 forest management districts across Georgia. Forest management districts are usually responsible for selling tickets to the general population to cut timber in their regions.

Conditions of forests belonging to former collective and state farms appear to have worsened since independence. Ill-equipped lumber companies have been being blamed for causing much damage to forests, particularly in Svaneti. Some transport cut trees by rolling them down mountains, which damages saplings and other young trees and creates conditions for mudslides and exhausted springs. Some companies have cut down entire forests, as happened in Djugareta, Kheledta and Melua.

19 Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs)

The most significant NGOs involved with forestry are environmental groups such as the Green Party and the World Wildlife Fund. They have replaced local organizations such as hunters’ unions, now largely defunct in many locales, as the primary private sector organizers of forestry conservation and management.3 These new environmental NGOs are more aggressive in protecting forests than community organizations, but have much less presence in local communities. They offer more critical assessments of forestry conditions and view issues in terms of entire ecosystems rather than merely forestry issues.

“ We NGOs see the forest as an ecosystem. The problem is not only in bark and firewood; the forest as an ecosystem is being destroyed along with its birds, animals, and insects.” (State and NGO focus group participant [NGO representative], male)

“ The data supplied by the Forestry department is false. They cannot control illegal forest cuts and say that the situation is satisfactory, while the reality is in fact critical.” (female NGO representative)

Therefore, NGOs suspect GOG’s inability to manage forest resources properly and they favor more sweeping measures to address problems than what government agencies are attempting. This aggressiveness has led to conflict with both Georgian government organizations and, to a lesser extent, the general population. Many government agencies and officials reportedly resist the effort by environmental NGOs to participate in forest management activities. NGOs report that some government officials have ignored videotaped evidence of forestry regulatory violations shown to them by NGOs. NGOs do not trust GOG’s forestry data and discount its dedication to managing forests properly.

Some among local populations feel environmental NGOs destroy job opportunities. In one example, the Green Party prevented construction of a waste recycling plant due to environmental concerns, precluding a number of job opportunities for local residents. However, NGOs and local populations cooperate on some issues. In one example, NGOs organized with local citizens an inspection of sawing mills to prevent forest cuttings.

Both environmental NGOs and prospective hunters’ unions have much potential to contribute to Georgia’s forest management. Both could help manage forests, involve and educate the public in forestry and environmental issues and, to some extent, provide jobs in the sector. However, few Georgian citizens in the study areas obtain information from environmental NGOs. Local hunters’ unions had much more presence in local communities (they developed hunting sites and spread salt for the animals) and they could build on this former presence to re-establish themselves as important stakeholders. Additionally, NGO representatives in focus groups could not articulate a role for the Georgian government, beyond greater cooperation and transparency.

3 Hunting is less commonly practiced than in the Soviet period due to its expense – bullet and gunpowder prices are high – and the declining number of animals in the forests. Hunting is primarily an amateur profession in Oni and Tsageri as hunters are now more likely to keep their kill than sell it.

20 Government Agencies

GOG has an inherent interest in successfully developing the forestry sector. A more vibrant and sustainable forestry sector would mean more income from taxes and fees and larger budgets. It would also increase employment in both the state and private sectors and lead to improvements in transportation infrastructure.

The forest resources of Georgia are managed primarily by four agencies: the State Forestry Department, the Institute of Mountain Forestry, the State Department of Protected Areas and Nature Reserves, and the Ministry of Food and Agriculture. The State Forestry Department is most important, as it manages 2.24 million hectares of forest on 2.5 million hectares of land. The Institute of Mountain Forestry manages 43,400 hectares of forests on about 55,00 hectares of land. The State Department of Protected Areas and Nature Reserves is responsible for protecting about 147,000 hectares of forests on 181,000 hectares of land.

Other government organizations are also important. The Coordinating Commission Supporting Forestry Development (the “Steering Committee”), comprising representatives from all relevant ministries, agencies and NGOs, has been formed to manage the overall Forest Development Program. The Forestry Commission, established by President Shevardnadze in 1996, addresses critical intergovernmental decision-making at the highest levels. The Parliamentary Committee on Environmental Protection and Natural Resources is also significant. Other government departments that are tangential to forest management in Georgia are the Ministry of Agriculture, the Ministry of Interior, the State Department of Land Management and the State Department of Tourism. Additionally, the Ministry of Construction and Urbanization is involved in land-use issues near urban areas.

Government representatives in focus groups offered conflicting views, depending on their responsibility and locale, and often could not articulate their mission. Inadequate direction is caused by confusion about responsibilities, pressures inherent in mediating conflicting demands, and poor communication among government agencies and with other stakeholders. Government stakeholders are responsible for implementing several, often contradictory, mandates or policy interests. Competing demands from communities on such issues as grazing, commercial cutting, fuelwood collection and use, agricultural use, privatization and conservation challenge government agencies. These challenges are amplified by inadequate forest-use and land-use plans as well as a lack of consensus among government decision-makers and the public on the future direction of forest policy. The lack of data about forests and their management contribute to these weaknesses considerably – and create mistrust between government agencies and with other stakeholders.

The State Forestry Department is the lead agency for forestry development, maintenance, protection, rehabilitation and other technical functions. Additionally, it is responsible for maintaining data on Georgia’s forests and regulating both the supply and demand for wood. It is now attempting to implement and enforce Georgia’s new Forest Code, which

21 replaced Soviet era laws that were ill-suited for Georgia,4 and the 1997 National Forestry Strategy. Because the department is attempting to regulate both the business and conservation sides of forest management, it has a conflict of interest in reconciling business interests with conservation interests.

The views in this department of forest management are far from unanimous. Some officials believe current conditions are quite good and forest management is satisfactory.

“Compared with other former Soviet Republics, the forests of Georgia are well preserved; the unsuspended and constant use principal has not been violated. In the last 40 to 50 years, the forest resources of Georgia have increased by 300 to 330 thousand hectares and the cortex (bark) resources by 43 million cubic meters. Forests cover 40 percent of the Georgian territory, so our country is the leader in this regard.” (male government representative).5

Others believe conditions are not being managed and the entire forestry system is out of control. They acknowledge that forests adjacent to villages are widely devastated.

“ Those forests that border the villages and dwelling houses are unsystematically cut by the population for survival purposes and are subsequently in a bad condition. We cannot control the situation.” (male government representative)

Some in the department claim it is ill-equipped to enforce forestry regulations, either because of lack of resources, lack of will, or both. Inadequate financial support, shortages of equipment, inadequate numbers of personnel, personnel who can receive far higher income by taking bribes than fulfilling their responsibilities, the dire need of many people to cut wood – legally or illegally, and the presence of organized crime are major reasons given for lack of enforcement by the department.

Municipal Forestry Departments & Employees are most responsible for implementing laws, regulations, policies and programs of the government. Their views can differ markedly from their superiors. Municipal and village governments represent a different set of local interests which sometimes resemble those of the national agencies and sometimes approximate those of the local population. They are strongly interested in improving Georgia’s forest management but are impeded by poor government resources. They have very little power over budgets, programs and policies impacting the forestry sector. They are told by GOG to carry out certain actions but resources to fund such activities are often delayed for months. Municipal departments in some areas have conflicted with GOG agencies, most notably in Svaneti, where

4 In the Soviet era Georgia managed its forests under laws that were designed for conditions in the Soviet European, Siberian and Far Eastern forests, which are very different from those of Georgia. 5 Members of other departments share this point of view. According to an official in the Georgia Eco-Police Department, “Even with the wood being cut illegally, Georgia’s forest resources will last for 25 years.”

22 the municipal forestry department is battling the GOG Tax Inspector’s Office in court. Local departments want more autonomy and resources to do their jobs.

Unlike their superiors in national agencies, local forestry departments and employees do not view Georgia’s Forest Code as superior to those of other countries and they do not like the current wood-felling permit system because it has weaknesses and loopholes and is difficult to enforce. Additionally, because they serve locally with the populations, forestry employees are more likely to be caught between conflicting interests of the local population and their superiors in various government forestry agencies. For example, some find it difficult to enforce wood cutting restrictions on their neighbor because they know how much that neighbor’s family needs the wood to survive. Additionally, forestry employees are often distracted by income-related issues. Most are paid little and many face prolonged delays in receiving their salaries. One employee admitted to accepting bribes to support himself.

Dynamics of Stakeholder Interests

The various interests of each of the stakeholders will influence the planning and implementation of the GFDP and also be influenced by it. Some stakeholders will have far greater influence over the GFDP than others. Further, some interests of the stakeholders will benefit the population, forest resources and the GFDP, while others will detract from one or more of them. The intensity and direction of these interests must be weighed accordingly if the GFDP is to succeed in helping the overall interests of Georgia. Table 2 below summarizes the basic orientations of each of the stakeholders toward important aspects of the project that has been discussed throughout this section.

23 Table 2: Summary of Stakeholder Orientations Opinion on Dependenc Use of Forest Top Issues of Opinion of Knowledge & Forest’s Health e on Forest Concern Government Participation General Mixed Heavy Wood Fuel & Low Income Mixed Low Popul Sales, Food; Unemployment ation Construction Transportation Poorest Greatest Fuel Wood Same Resist Lowest Restrictions Middle Poor Heavy Wood Cutting Same Critical Medium And Selling Resist Fuelwood Restrictions Least Poor Least Heavy Buying Fuel Same; Critical Higher Wood Electricity & Healthcare Tsageri Bad & Higher Worsening Oni Good / Improving Ambrolauri Lentekhi Loggers Heavy Logging NGOs Environmental Disastrous Heavy Issues Cause Forestry Critical Highest Degradation Distrustful Knowledge; some exclusion Hunters Light Hunting Government Mixed Heavy Responsibility Mixed Mixed Budget National Mixed Heavy Responsibility Mixed Mixed Agencies Budget Municipal Mixed Heavy Responsibility Critical Mixed Agencies

24 Local Employees Mixed Heavy Responsibility Critical Mixed Bribes

25 Overall it illustrates heterogeneous interests among the general population. All three expenditure segments are critical of government. The two poorest groups are most likely to resist government restrictions on forestry use because forest resources comprise a greater percentage of their total resource base. The poorest segment may be most resistant to cutting restrictions. This will be particularly true in Oni, where many residents believe forestry conditions are good and improving. However, all of these groups are the least informed about forestry resource issues and could be influenced positively with credible information about various aspects of forest management. Tsageri, where many residents believe forestry degradation is bad and worsening, will be more amenable to restrictions. Additionally, the are more hospitable to receiving forest management information.

The GFDP project team will face myriad interests within the GOG and may face significant pockets of resistance in some of them. Every level has both those that view the essential health of forest resources as good, and those that feel it is bad. Some in every agency will give more weight to the environmental stewardship of forest resources, while others will emphasize the potential budgetary resources they could yield from them. Those at the municipal level may be more interested in the financial benefits of forest management as they struggle to earn a living and fulfill local responsibilities with meager budgets.

The environmental NGOs and commercial loggers are likely to represent the extreme ends of the forest resources political spectrum. Those planning and implementing the GFDP should carefully listen to these two likely extremes for several reasons. First, each offers government agencies much information from which it can benefit. Second, the interests of each are clear, coherent and, therefore, persistent and powerful. The environmental NGOs also enjoy strong institutional support internationally. They need to feel that GFDP project managers are listening to them and accommodating their interests. However, if the loggers and environmental NGOs indeed turn out to represent the extreme ends of the forest resources political spectrum, then GFDP project managers should place their agendas secondary to the interests of the general population and the long-term health of Georgia’s forests. These myriad actors and interests will produce conflict. Table 3 below summarizes the actors and the issues over which they will compete.

26 Table 3: Potential Conflicts During Project Planning & Implementation Poorest Middle Poor Least Poor NGOs Government Poorest Licensing Restrictions (esp. Licensing Restrictions & Fees (esp. Oni) Oni) Nature Preserves & Nature Preserves & Privatization Privatization Corruption Private Investment Enforcement Oni & Lentekhi Middle Poor Licensing Restrictions (esp. Licensing Restrictions & Fees (esp. Oni) Oni) Nature Preserves & Nature Preserves & Privatization Privatization Corruption Private Investment Enforcement Oni, Lentekhi & Tsageri Least Poor Alternative Fuels Maybe Licensing Restrictions Maybe Licensing Restrictions & Fees Lowers Wood Prices Alternative fuels important. to alternative fuels important to this this Private Investment Electricity Wants Tsageri Corruption Enforcement Tsageri Loggers Cutting & Cutting & Cutting & Forestry Cutting and Forestry Mgt. Cutting & Forestry Mgt. Forestry Forestry Mgmnt. Mgt. Privatization Privatization Mgmnt. Privatization Privatization Exports Exports Privatization Exports Exports Enforcement Exports NGOs Licensing Restrictions Nature Preserves vs. Privatization Budget, Decentralization & Data Participation of NGOs Corruption Enforcement Government Licensing Restrictions Nature Preserves & Privatization Decentralization & Budget Enforcement

27 28 The major points of conflict are as follows:

 Government agencies versus other government agencies, depending on the issue;

 Between government agencies and all other actors, depending on the issue;

 Between would-be loggers and all other actors across-the-board;

 Between NGOs and would-be loggers (fighting to lift the temporary ban on logging);

 Between NGOs and the general population, depending on the issue; and

 Between NGOs and certain elements of the State Forestry Department and other government agencies, depending on the issue.

The principal conflicts will focus on enforcement of existing laws and the extent to which Georgia accommodates business interests against preservation interests. Corruption and data collection and use will be important issues as they impact the balance of power on the other issues. A less predictable factor is the extent to which the eventual availability of alternative fuels impacts the extent to which the least poor support more stringent licensing restrictions, as well as their impact on the prices that wood cutters receive for their wood.

Many conflict points will exist within the GOG and between GOG and local authorities. Individuals and departments throughout these government levels will compete on most of the major issues confronting forestry resource management. Issues involving decentralization, budgeting and data collection and analysis are likely to create the most intra-governmental conflict.

Main Social Development Issues

There are several key social development issues facing Georgia as it manages its forest resources. Ongoing degradation of Georgian forests, poverty and subsistence living, an energy crisis of energy, excessive tree cutting, declining healthcare, inadequate roads, out-migration and a dearth of credit services are all challenging the GOG and the study areas’ population. GOG’s incapacity impedes satisfactory resolution of these issues. These key social development issues are detailed below.

Forestry Degradation

Statistics of forestry development, forestry cutting and wood consumption that are credible to all of the stakeholders do not exist. As a result, there is little statistical evidence that Georgia’s forests are declining or that such degradation is a threat to Georgia’s natural resource base, economy or society in general. However, most people believe that the forests are in decline generally. Generally, an annual consumption rate of 7 cubic meters of wood per rural family is considered average. Table 4 below indicates that annual consumption of fuel wood exceeds this average in every district but Oni. Fuel wood consumption is usually greater in the study area than found nationally.

29 Table 4: Usage Rates, Productivity and Future Uses of Forests Oni Ambrolaur Tsageri Lentekhi Average i Quantity of Fuel Wood Use Annually 6.96 9.29 12.2 12.34 10.19 (m3 per family) Current Condition of Forest Resources Deteriorated 55.3% 82% 78.7% 46% 64% Same 42.7% 18% 21.3% 59.3% 35.3% Improved 2% 0% 0% 0.7% 0.7% Results of Activities Now vs. 5 Years Ago Worse 39% 64.8% 77.4% 37.2% 52.9% Same 57.5% 35.2% 22.6% 50.7% 42.8% Better 3.4% 0% 0% 2.7% Don’t Know 0% 0% 0% 9.5% 2.6% Desire to Establish Forest-Based 10.7% 14.7% 42% 36.7% 26% Business? Do Not 89.3% 84.7% 58% 63.3% 73.8%

The majority of households feel that forest conditions have deteriorated over the past five years and that the results of forest-related activities are now worse than five years ago. Very few people believe that conditions have improved – and none in Ambrolauri or Tsageri believe so.

“ Forests should be cut based on a selective method. It’s bad that the population is cutting the forest repeatedly in one and the same place.” (male participant in government/NGO focus group).

Participants in the SA understand forests are deteriorating and blame several major factors for it. Table 5 below presents opinions of study participants on the major causes of forestry degradation. Respondents primarily blame the most obvious problem -- too much cutting of fuel wood. They also attribute forestry degradation to pollution, weather changes, human encroachment, exporting and poverty. The table indicates that people do not see a link between their poverty and excessive cutting of firewood.

30 Table 5: Major Causes of Forestry Degradation Given by Public

Causes Oni Ambrolaur Tsageri Lentekhi Average i Excessive Wood Cutting for Firewood 58.5% 69.8% 59.3% 77.6% 64.6% Poaching 16.9% 16.6% 22.6% 3.9% 17.1% Global Changes in Climate 13.8% 5.9% 10.6% 7.9% 9.6% Air Pollution 3.1% 2.4% 4.5% 3.9% 3.5% Fertilizers & Other Chemicals 1.5% 1.2% 0.5% 0% 0.9% Converting Natural Forests to Agri. 0.8% 1.8% 1.5% 6.6% 2.1% Expansion of Urban Areas 3.8% 0.6% 0.5% 0% 1.2% Expansion of Recreation Areas 0.8% 1.8% 0% 0% 0.7% Mass Exporting 0.8% 0% 0% 0% 0.2% Economic Poverty 0% 0% 0.5% 0% 0.2%

Views of forestry conditions change depending on which district a person lives in. Oni’s residents were most likely to consider the woods there to be in good condition and about 43 percent felt that overall forest conditions had remained the same. Most Oni focus group participants stated that forests are actually increasing in size and even overtaking pastures. Foresters, youth and women who have close contract with Oni forests all reported evidence of natural afforestation. One woman reported that open fields she had played in as a child were now heavily wooded with trees.

“ Everyone cuts the forest in Oni – that’s how we survive the whole year round. But the current quantity of wood being cut is only about five percent of former times. About 30 wood processing workshops used to be operating in the nearby villages. There was no problem with power and transportation in those times. The current timber production compared to the old days is almost equal to zero. On one hand, it’s good for forest protection, but on the other hand it’s bad as there is no income anymore. Actually, a planned cut would not harm our forests (53-year old male procurement agent from Oni).

“We do not have the statistics, but I see the trees cut by the population and different private companies, as well as the trees brought down by the floods and rivers, and it makes me think that our forests are in a critical state.” (51- year old female teacher from Tsageri)

The excessive cutting is part of what is hurting wildlife populations and hunting. Forestry and hunters’ unions were formerly active in developing hunting sites and spreading salt for animals, but

31 these efforts have ceased. They report that increased forest cutting and use of electric saws have frightened off the animals.

“Once, upon entering the woods you could easily track the animals, but now after a whole day of tracking you might not find a single one, even with the help of dogs.” (45-year old male hunter from Tsageri).

Overall, the general population, environmental NGOs and many government officials feel that Georgia’s forests are in general decline. They ascribe several major causes to this decline. The sections below detail these perceived causes and illuminate their impact on Georgia’s social development.

Poverty

Residents of the study areas have a large number of problems and issues, but poverty appears to dominate. Despite the views of the general population, poverty is one of the major root causes of forestry degradation.

“There is a lot of talk about the importance of ecological training. That’s good, but extreme poverty pushes the people to cut trees.” (male participant in government/NGO focus group).

“ Socioeconomic conditions have a direct impact on forest felling. These factors are dependent on each other: the rise of poverty among the population will result in an increase in felling. Sometimes the forest becomes the only means of survival. In fact, the population is felling the forest just to buy a sack of wheat.” (In-depth interview with male participant.)

A large number of families cannot afford even basic necessities due to unemployment, low salaries and income, and delayed salary and income payments. Conditions vary widely from province to province, but individual families in all study areas depend on a variety of sources for income. Fortunately, most citizens in the four study areas own their own homes, have their own small land plots, have access to government-controlled land, and can depend on remittances from relatives for a considerable proportion of their cash income. Their relative poverty forces them into subsistence agriculture -- almost all residents produce their own vegetables, fruits and/or meat production from their own land or government-controlled land. Lack of working equipment makes subsistence agriculture very inefficient.

In this context of relative poverty, forest resources are not important to income or employment for an overwhelming majority of households in any of the provinces. However, forests are critical to almost every household for fuel and cooking needs and is important to many families as a supplier of hay, plants or wild game. The expense and/or unavailability of alternative energy supplies such as kerosene, gas or electricity necessitates cutting and gathering wood from nearby forests.

32 Table 6 below indicates that unemployment, income shortfalls and the resulting poor living conditions are widespread and represent the most important problems out of a large number of possibilities. The data indicate that unemployment in the study areas is as high as 20 percent and approaching 30 percent in some locales (Ambrolauri). The combination of low income and delayed payments of money owed afflict more than 40 percent of residents of Oni, Ambrolauri and Tsageri, and nearly a third of Lentekhi residents. The problems posed by land shortages were reported as significant only in Lentekhi. These five problems far outweigh the 17 others given by respondents.

Table 6: Three Most Serious Household Problems (Each Respondent Gave 3 Answers) Oni Ambrolauri Tsageri Lentekhi Low Income 16% 15.3% 24% 14.6% Delays In Salary/Pension, etc. 24.7% 26.8% 19.5% 16.4% Unemployment 16.7% 28.9% 20.4% 22.2% Poor Living Conditions 7.2% 10% 8.1% 9.7% Shortage of Land 0.9% 3.5% 3.8% 14.4% Other (17 Other Answers) 34.5% 15.5% 24.2% 22.7%

Social ills add to the overt problems of widespread unemployment (poverty, over- dependence on natural resources, etc.). A lack of employment opportunities can lead to a willingness to engage in illegitimate and illegal activities by some individuals. It also encourages despondence and apathy, and forces individuals to accept jobs that may not utilize or further their skills. They also hinder involvement by individuals and families in community affairs, further precluding community-wide solutions to social problems. Subsistence living results in barter, which inhibits economic development and discourages independence even as it cuts communities off from the telephone and postal services and the outside world.

Income Levels. The SA found why Georgians feel that employment and income-related issues are their most important problems – unemployment is relatively high and income levels are very low, often precluding families from purchasing basic necessities. Many people in all four areas studied suffer significant shortfalls of income. Table 7 below details this condition.

Table 7: Standard of Living by Region Oni Ambrolauri Tsageri Lentekhi Insufficient Money to Buy Food (Poorest) 50% 23.3% 0.7% 45.3% Can Buy Food With Difficulty (Middle Poor) 32% 70.7% 46% 42% Sufficient Money to Buy Food & Clothes (Least 18% 6% 52.7% 12.7% Poor) Can Buy Some Expensive Goods 0% 0% 0.7% 0%

The Majority of respondents in Oni, Ambrolauri and Lentekhi do not have enough income to feed and clothe themselves. Less than 20 percent of people in these three regions have sufficient income to cover basic necessities. Almost all people in Tsageri can feed themselves

33 and a majority can provide basic necessities. But the vast majority of Georgian citizens in the study areas cannot depend on cash income to survive.

As noted earlier in the stakeholder section, the character of the SA survey and those participating in it makes it difficult to attribute income or expenditure levels to each of the groups in Figure 7. However, the SA survey does suggest some expenditure ranges for each of these groups. About 25 percent of the sample cannot afford to buy either food or clothes (the Poorest). Their monthly expenditures range from nine to 55 laris (US$5 – 29) a month and average 32 laris (US$17). The next economic segment – those that can afford to buy foot but often cannot buy clothes (the Middle Poor) – also comprises about 25 percent of the population. Their monthly expenditures range from 55 to 145 laris (US$29 - 76) and average 100 laris (US$52). Households that are able to buy both food and clothes (the Least Poor) represent the remainder of the sample. Their monthly expenditures range from 145 – 235 laris (US$76 - $123) and average 190 laris (US$99). The monthly median income is about 120 laris (US$63) and the monthly median expenditure is about 162 laris (US$85).

Sources of Income. The provinces are different in their sources of income. Table 8 below addresses what proportion of adults work in various fields. When measuring by the number of jobs or income-earning activities, most families depend less on forest-related activities than any other occupation except industry-building. Tsageri depends more on forests for work than the other provinces, but trade, consumer services and socially-related services are still more important.

Table 8: Types of Jobs Most Held by Population Oni Ambrolauri Tsageri Lentekhi Crop Cultivation 50.6% 6.3% 3.4% 44.7% Livestock Raising 28.8% 6.3% 3.8% 18.4% Trade, Food Service, Technical or Procurement 5.1% 15.9% 37% 3.5% Healthcare, Social Services, Ed., Culture, etc. 7.8% 34.5% 17.8% 16.7% Public Utilities, Services, Transp. or Commun. 3.1% 23.8% 11% 7.4% Industry Building 1.9% 1.6% 12.7% 1.8% Forestry-Related (Extraction, Processing, Foraging, 2.8% 4.8% 13.8% 6.2% Hunting, Fishing, Environmental Protection) Other 0% 6.8% 1.5% 1.3% Columns may not add to 100% due to rounding.

Oni and Lentekhi have the greatest percentage of households engaged in agricultural- related activities (nearly 80 percent and 63 percent, respectively). In contrast, Ambrolauri and Tsageri have more than 75 percent of their residents employed in non-agricultural and non- forestry-related work.

The SA also measured the amount of income households derive from various activities. Household income structure varies considerably between each province – none are similar. Table 9 below indicates that the absolute size of income differs greatly as do the sources of income. Oni households are most dependent on job wages, pensions and other benefits, and remittances from relatives – about 75 percent of total income by their own estimate. The other

34 three provinces receive less than half (between 43 percent and 48 percent) of their monthly income from job wages, social benefits and relatives.

35 Table 9: Sources of Household Income (Average Lari per Month) Source Oni Ambrolauri Tsageri Lentekhi Average Job 31.61 22.97 38.89 67.66 40.28 Government 12.97 12.31 9.77 14.98 12.51 (Pension, Social Safety, etc.) Relatives 25.01 15.47 38.27 33.49 28.06 Trading 7.87 0.6 65.43 18.20 23.03 Crops/Gardens (includes renting 3.09 13.47 13.86 31.25 15.42 land) Livestock (meat and dairy) 7.89 32.57 27.6 40.52 27.15 Sales of Forest Resources (wood, 3.13 2.23 37.65 13.59 14.15 foraging, hunting, fishing, etc.) Total * 91.57 99.62 231.47 219.69 160.59 * The question for this data is used to determine sources of income rather than average household income. Respondents were asked to estimate how much income they received from various sources, not their total cash income. Use caution in interpreting total income data.

The similarities between Ambrolauri, Tsageri and Lentekhi end here. Households in Ambrolauri receive about 50 percent of their income from cultivation, livestock or forest-related items such as wood. Tsageri households are more entrepreneurial – they receive about 1/3 of their income from agriculture and forestry activities, but also earn about 28 percent from trading. Lentekhi households fall between Tsageri and Ambrolauri in terms of trading income and income from agricultural and forestry-related activities. These data indicate that households in each province have different interests and, therefore, are likely to act differently various program proposals.

Importantly, sales of forest-related items are a small proportion of income for all four provinces. Households in Lentekhi, Ambrolauri, and Oni receive less than six percent of their cash income from forestry-related items. Tsageri residents are more dependent, but still only receive about 16 percent of income. In all four cases, incomes from cultivation and livestock, relatives, and jobs/pensions are all more important than income from the forest. Further, trading income is far more important to residents in three out of four provinces (trading income in Ambrolauri is only slightly more insignificant than income from forestry-related items). The forest as a source of cash income is not critical to households in any of the study areas.

“Can you image the poverty of people going into the forest with an axe to cut a tree that is two meters in diameter just to sell the wood? They have no mechanical or electric saws for massive forest cuts and the insignificant income generated from these cuts is hardly proportionate to the level of work it entails.” (45-year old male hunter from Tsageri).

The social safety net appears to be both very important to households and very tentative for them. Figure 10 indicates that income from relatives and government programs (pensions,

36 social safety, etc.) account for between 21 percent and 42 percent of an average household’s income, depending on the locale. Social safety income and remittances are more important to the average household than forestry-related income and trading in most cases. This income is also heavily dependent on relatives, making it highly tentative.

Georgian households in the study areas are fortunate to own their own homes, providing some stability as families struggle to obtain other basic necessities. Table 10 below indicates that nearly every resident owns their own home and such ownership is recognized by the government.

Table 10: Homeownership and Titling Oni Ambrolauri Tsageri Lentekhi Family Member Owns the Residence 99.3% 99.3% 100% 100% Family Possesses State Title for Home 98.7% 95.3% 93.3% 97.3%

Subsistence Living. The SA found that many households in all four provinces are subsisting on vegetables, crops or livestock grown on their own land or state-owned land. The sources of cash income analyzed above mask the importance of private subsistence agriculture to most households. Table 11 below indicates that virtually all families own or use land plots and intend to keep them. Almost all households in the four study areas own or use land. The small proportion of people who intend to sell their land plan to move to other parts of Georgia or to another country. Consequently, virtually all landowners staying in these four provinces intend to keep their land.

Table 11: Use of Land Plots Oni Ambrolauri Tsageri Lentekhi Own or Use Land 92.7% 99.3% 92.7% 94.7% Plans to Sell Land 4% 0.7% 0.7% 1.9% Involved In Agricultural Production 65.3% 99.3% 82.7% 92% Crop Production Past 5 Years – Increased 6.1% 10.8% 11.4% 22.5% -- Decreased 73.5% 40.5% 72.4% 28.3% -- Not Applicable or Don’t Know 20.4% 48.6% 16.3% 49.3% Animals Raised Past 5 Years – Increased 10.7% 2.7% 10% 19.3% -- Decreased 30.7% 19.3% 41.3% 28.7% -- Same 58.7% 78% 48.7% 52%

The table also shows that farming and livestock raising are farm more important in all four regions than indicated by the income and employment data in Tables 12 and 13. This is true because most households are involved in agricultural production for subsistence reasons. They cannot afford to purchase food so they are raising food for their own consumption on their own land. More than 90 percent of households in Ambrolauri and Lentekhi grow fruit or vegetables or raise livestock. More than 80 percent of Tsageri households are engaged in agriculture as are nearly 2/3 of Oni households. However, in all provinces agricultural production for most households has been more likely to decrease than increase. The number of people seeing declines in crop production in Oni and Tsageri is particularly large. This trend implies declining income for and decreasing ability to feed themselves.

37 Table 12 below shows the critical importance of subsistence agriculture in all four study areas. Except for Tsageri, the average household grows about 2/3 of its own food consumption. Compare the value of this consumption on a weekly basis with an estimate of monthly cash income – the value of the homegrown food far exceeds what the average household may earn in a month in Oni and Ambrolauri and nearly matches possible monthly earnings for the average household in Tsageri and Lentekhi. Most households would not be able to survive without the food grown on their own land.

Table 12: Contribution of Own Land to Living of Average Household Oni Ambrolauri Tsageri Lentekhi % Food Consumption Grown 60.45% 69.99% 38.13% 66.23% on Own Land Cost of This Food If Purchased 25.33 52.92 44.43 49.43 (Lari per week) Total Household Income 25.934 53.6199 44.8113 50.0923 (Lari per Month) * 5 * The question for this data is used to determine sources of income rather than average household income. Respondents were asked to estimate how much income they received from various sources, not their total cash income. Use caution in interpreting total income data.

The composition of this land varies widely. The average household has small parcels of land to use in their yard, at their summer home, or a vegetable plot somewhere near their regular home. Very few have their own farms or access to land on collective farms. Households in Ambrolauri and Tsageri are exceptions which have access to state land and collective farms for grazing and vegetable plots. Additionally, some households hunt, gather hay, collect fruits and medicines, and graze their livestock in forest areas, although the number of livestock is declining because forests are yielding less food for animals. Figure 13 details the average number of hectares available to households in the study areas.

Table 13: Amount & Types of Land to Support Agricultural Production (average number of hectares) Oni Ambrolauri Tsageri Lentekhi Average Yard 0.06 0.43 0.26 0.06 0.2 Plot at Summer Home 0 0.22 0.02 0.22 0.12 Vegetable Plot 0.07 0.04 0.24 0.12 0.12 Farm 0 0.01 0.15 0.02 0.05 Plot in Collective Farm 0.01 0.01 0.42 0 0.11 Private Land Used for Crop Cultivation 0.12 0.55 0.53 0.2 0.35 Private Land Used for Grazing 0.06 0.1 0.19 1.06 0.35 State Land Used for Crop Cultivation 0 0 0 0 0 State Land Used for Grazing 0.07 3.56 0.02 0.5 1.08

The majority of the population cultivates honey, corn, potatoes and beans. Households use grazing areas primarily for poultry, cattle and pigs. Some households have sheep and goats particularly in Oni and Tsageri. Households in Tsageri and Ambrolauri are more inclined to

38 raise bees. Table 14 below details the average number of animals/hives that households in the study areas have.

39 Table 14: Average Number of Animals/Hives Per Household Oni Ambrolauri Tsageri Lentekhi Average Cattle 2.38 2.21 3.04 3.56 2.80 Sheep 2.11 0.09 0.95 0.01 0.79 Goats 0.25 0.02 1.35 0.2 0.46 Pigs 2.42 1.94 2.51 2.89 2.44 Poultry 12.71 13.18 26.65 9.14 15.42 Bee Hives 0.38 1.17 2.72 0.36 1.16

Despite the widespread holding of land and its full utilization for subsistence agriculture, no households had land certificates. While they had land-giving and receiving rights, most landowners were unaware of their rights to their land and its development potential. However, most households believed that land distribution had been implemented fairly. Residents of Tsageri are an exception. Many in Tsageri believe the process was unfair, largely due to the overall scarcity of land resources there. Some of these households lack the necessary land to support their food needs.

According to one 42-year old male forester from Sheubani village, “Some of the villages are so short of arable land that the crops grown by the villagers are not sufficient to sustain them throughout the winter. The people will collect mushrooms, dry them, and use them instead of potatoes in the winter months.”

“Some have their land at the edge of a precipice; they work it all year through but in the spring the river waters may cause major damage t the harvest. This kind of thing happens frequently, but people still cultivate their land.” (Male, 31 years old, from Oni)

In some cases this was due to the distribution of land during privatization and, in other cases, it is due to road-building needs.

In one example, a 58-year old female from Tsageri said, “They [the state] have taken away from me the land that I had because they wanted to make new roads. They promised to give me new parcels in return, which I have not yet received. I’m tired of asking. Everyone knows that land is the only way to earn a living.”

There is also a shortage of farming equipment. Existing tractors are often virtually useless, as their technical inspection is very expensive (300-500 laris or US$157 – US$262). The tractor owners largely do not have the money to maintain their machines, and the landowners cannot afford to hire the tractors. Bulls are gaining popularity for plowing and harvesting purposes.

Energy Crisis

40 A major manifestation of the country’s poverty is its energy crisis. Georgia’s energy crisis is acute, especially during winter months. Urban areas often receive as little as four hours of electricity a day and the supply to rural areas can be even less. Urban dwellers typically rely on natural gas and kerosene to keep warm and cook meals during the annual crisis, but rural inhabitants are less likely to access these fuel alternatives and generally cannot afford to utilize non-wood forms of fuel. Their cooking and heating needs are served by the only available energy supply – wood from the forests. All other potential supplies such as kerosene, gas and electricity are too expensive or unavailable. The general population perceives that the resulting demand for wood cutting is depleting their supply of heating and cooking materials and making such activities more difficult.

Wood Cutting and Use. Subsistence farming is as critical to most households as cash income. Without it, most households across the four study areas could not survive. Likewise, woodcutting and gathering are also critical to household needs, although earlier data appeared to minimize their importance. Forestry-related employment and income are relatively minor contributors to household welfare, but the cutting and collection of wood for heating and cooking needs are critical. Table 15 below shows how many families are cutting wood from Georgian forests and that heating dominates its use.

Table 15: Wood Cutting and Collection of Branches and Other Resources Oni Ambrolauri Tsageri Lentekhi Average No Wood Cutting 44% 31.3% 42% 25.3% 35.7% Collect Branches and Parts of Trees 64.7% 15.3% 50% 71.3% 50.3% Collect Branches For Own Use 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Engaged in Wood Cutting 56% 68.7% 58% 74.7% 64.3% Use as Fuel 96.4% 100% 72.1% 96.4% 91.9% Sell Commercially 3.6% 0% 25.6% 3.6% 7.6% Use for Construction 0% 0% 2.3% 0% 0.5% Collect Plants from Forest 30% 38.7% 39.3% 19.3% 31.8% Collect Hay from Forest 72.7% 66% 38.7% 77.3% 63.7% Hunt in Forest 13.3% 17.3% 34% 33.3% 24.5%

Nearly 2/3 of all families in the study actively cut wood. Families in Lentekhi and Ambrolauri are especially active. Ninety percent of households who cut wood use the wood as fuel for heating and cooking. Tsageri is the only study area where a significant minority of households cut wood for commercial purposes rather than for their own use. Additionally, most households in all areas but Ambrolauri collect branches and, of those that do so, all use the wood for their own use. Those that do not cut wood or collect branches purchase them from, or barter with others that do. An eight cubic meter supply costs about 11 laris (US$5.76). Many residents also use forest resources to collect hay for feeding their livestock. Additionally, about 25 percent hunt in forests and nearly a third collect plants. The forest serves many purposes to most residents of the study areas.

Table 16 below shows that this wood cutting and collection is critical to household heating and cooking needs. Nearly all households obtain at least some of their cooking and heating fuels from forest resources. Less than four percent of all households collect less than

41 half of their cooking needs from forests. Less than one percent collect less than half their heating needs from forests.

42 Table 16: % of Cooking and Heating Fuel Obtained From Forest Oni Ambrolauri Tsageri Lentekhi Average % Cooking Fuel From Forest 98.7% 99.3% 100% 99.3% 99.3% All Cooking Fuel 58.7% 16% 30.7% 28.7% 33.5% More Than Half 8.7% 53.3% 40.7% 49.3% 38% Half 28% 26% 25.3% 19.3% 24.7% Less Than Half 3.3% 4% 3.3% 2% 3.2% % Heating Fuel From Forest 100% 100% 100% 99% 99.8% All Heating Fuel 70.7% 74.7% 82.7% 76.5% 76.1% More Than Half 24% 16.7% 13.3% 16.8% 17.7% Half 4.7% 8% 4% 5.4% 5.5% Less Than Half 0.7% 0.7% 0% 0.7% 0.5%

“I really cannot afford to buy firewood for the winter; I am alone with my disabled son, so I collect the wood brought down by floods.” (58-year old female from Tsageri)

Table 17 below indicates that households use wood for such a large proportion of their needs because they view it as superior to alternative energy sources. Other energy sources are too expensive, unavailable, or both. Non-wood sources of heating fuel are viable only to small numbers of people in Oni (Kerosene and electricity), Tsageri (kerosene and gas), and Ambrolauri and Lentekhi (electricity). With food and clothing barely attainable for most households, and discussed earlier, addressing heating and cooking needs via wood cutting and gathering is vital to these households.

Table 17: Sources of Fuel and Superiority of Wood Fuel Sources Oni Ambrolauri Tsageri Lentekhi Average Wood 79.2% 94.3% 90.5% 87.6% 87.5% Gas 0% 0% 2.4% 0% 0.6% Kerosene 20.3% 0% 7.1% 0% 7.4% Manure 0% 0.6% 0% 0% 0.1% Electricity 3.3% 5% 0% 12.4% 4.4% Non-Wood Sources Too Expensive 85.1% 95.7% 97.8% 89.5% 90.2% Short Supply of Non-Wood 14.9% 4.3% 2.2% 8.5% 9.3% Sources

A household’s standard of living determines who is most likely to cut or collect wood. While 2/3 of households cut wood, 77 percent of the poorest cut wood and 100 percent of this group does so to obtain fuel. This proportion declines as standard of living improves – 60 percent of the middle poor cut wood and 58 percent of the least poor cut wood.

The combination of lack alternative energy supplies and the lack of income to procure them is the critical factor causing excessive use of existing forest resources. If households had more income to afford alternative energy supplies such as electricity, kerosene and gas, much pressure on forest resources would be alleviated -- and energy supplies would likely come onto the market to satisfy increasing demand and prices for them.

43 Cutting and gathering wood is also labor-intensive and time-intensive. About half the sample saves money to purchase fuel to transport firewood, but the other half have no such money, so they transport wood using wagons (34 percent) or by hand (11 percent). But as the yield of such activities worsen, families will need to use more people and/or more time to collect wood. Utilizing other forms of energy are likely to increase the productivity of labor, enabling household members to focus on income-generation or other more productive activities.

Government Inaction

The SA found that many Georgians feel that GOG has been slow or uncertain to address various social development issues. The general population wants more government action to address forestry degradation. They believe that government inaction is largely to blame for deteriorating forests. Although most of the public is not knowledgeable about laws and government actions that have been taken, the small number of people who are knowledgeable generally support government measures, particularly the Forest Code and the need to license wood cutting. However, focus groups indicate that more laws are needed, existing laws are not enforced adequately, and the programs and policies addressing roads and international trade are needed to mitigate damage to forest resources.

The SA found that a large disconnect between GOG, local government agencies and the general population exists. The public blames inadequate government for the worsening condition of Georgian forests. Nearly four in five respondents attribute government politics or inadequate government functioning for worsening forestry conditions. As shown in Table 18 below, nearly half those asked feel that government generally has been failing forests, while about one third blame government for specific problems with licensing, roads, or shortages of alternative fuels.

Table 18: Reasons for Worsening Forestry Conditions Oni Ambrolauri Tsageri Lentekhi Average Government Politics 5.8% 47.1% 65.7% 16.7% 38% Government Does Nothing / No Control 2.9% 0% 2% 16.7% 7% Licensing Constraints / Problems 20.3% 2% 11.8% 1.4% 8.4% Deterioration of Forest Roads 21.7% 20.6% 8.8% 19.4% 17.1% Shortage of Non-Wood Products 0% 7.8% 2.9% 16.7% 6.7% Weather Conditions 49.3% 16.7% 5.9% 26.4% 22% Other 0% 0% 0% 2.8% 0.6%

SA participants feel that government must take action to address these problems, particularly on the demand side. Table 19 below shows that about 51 percent feel that government should restrict use of forest resources or increase controls on exporting wood. Nearly a third believe government should make available alternative energy sources to obviate the need to cut wood.

44 Table 19: Actions Public Feels Government Should Take Action Oni Ambrolaur Tsageri Lentekhi Average i Intensify Wood Export Controls 23.2% 34.9% 37.2% 32% 31.8% Restrict Use of Forests 22.2% 26.8% 8.7% 19.2% 19.1% Avail Alternative Energy Sources 29% 27.1% 38.5% 24.1% 29.8% Inform Population About Problems 15.6% 4.4% 3.5% 12.4% 8.9% Improve Forest Management 8.9% 6.1% 10.9% 5.5% 7.9% Don’t Know 0.7% 0.3% 1.3% 6.9% 2.3% Build Roads 0.3% 0% 0% 0% 0.1%

Existing Laws. Existing laws address some but not all of these issues. In June, 1999 Georgia has passed the new Forest Code and has a licensing system to regulate wood cutting. The Forest Code established a legal framework and long range plan to transition its forests to market principles while safeguarding their critical environmental, social and cultural functions. It recognizes for the first time all types of forest ownership and provides for greater leeway in providing access to forest resources. The organization, management and financing measures in the code address the institutions responsible for implementing forestry-related laws and regulations, preservation and protection, development of forestry-related data, forest-use and land-use plans, and commercial logging.

The SA found mixed opinions of Georgia’s Forest Code. Some believe that it is far superior to the forestry laws of other countries in the region or the former Soviet Union. These views are found in central government agencies and among NGOs.

“The law is good, but it is not effective.” (female SA participant).

“ Recently we compared our Forest Code and its subordinate acts with the Latvian Code: ours was much better.” (male SA participant).

Local forestry officials who are responsible for implementing the Code are more critical, stating that it has too many loopholes and is difficult to enforce. The Code should institute norms for amounts of wood that are permissible to cut.

“ The legal implementation mechanisms need improving.” (male SA participant).

The licensing system used to regulate wood cutting also received mixed reviews. To cut wood, citizens are required to purchase tickets from a forest farm that specifies limits to the activity. As indicated above, the general population supports licensing of wood cutting and some focus group participants say the public generally complies with the law. However, some responsible at a local level to implement the licensing system are dissatisfied with its loopholes and poor design that make it difficult to enforce. The ticket system, in particular, is not effective. Other local forestry officials acknowledge the licensing system’s weaknesses but state it is the only means to control wood cutting.

45 International trade laws and policies affecting forestry resource management also engender differing opinions. Imports and exports of wood and wood products are a focus of NGOs, government officials and the general population. The general population perceives that the international wood trade is hurting Georgia’s forests. However, GOG trade restrictions pressure forest resources further. On the import side, high tariffs have been imposed to reduce wood imports, predominantly from Russia. The reduced foreign wood supply increases demand domestically for Georgian wood and increases forest cutting.

On the export side, GOG’s temporary ban on wood exports has three consequences. First, it does reduce the amount of exports and decreases incentives to harvest the forests. However, a large amount of wood is still cut and exported illegally. Because it is done without authorization, the government is not able to regulate the cutting and, therefore, has little knowledge or control over how much this cutting damages forests. Second, the export ban deprives GOG of much-need resources to help manage forest resources more effectively. Combined with low stumpage fees, it leaves GOG and, especially, local forestry authorities, little funding with which to enforce laws and regulations.

“People think about survival – selected cuts are not implemented. Some of the trees that are cut are sold very cheaply – the Turks are paying low prices for lumber these days.” (male government/NGO focus group participant).

Inadequate Enforcement. The SA found that GOG is not enforcing its forestry-related laws adequately. Focus groups and the survey, as indicated in Figures 18 and 19 above, found a large number of people who feel the government is doing a poor job of enforcing laws and that this is a leading cause of forestry degradation. The vast majority of NGO representatives considered the enforcement of forestry laws in Georgia to be weak at best and non-existent at worst.

According to a representative of the Tsageri Municipal Forestry Department, in 1999 the total number of wood felling permits issued had exceeded the official limit by 8,900 cubic meters – and the year was far from over. The official limit is 10,000 cubic meters annually, but in reality, the amount cut is five times greater. GOG is carrying out some law enforcement activities. According to one focus group participant, 182 criminal court cases for unlawfully felling wood were ongoing in Georgia as of autumn, 1999. This number is in addition to the large number of cases that are deemed civil violations rather than criminal violations.

“The main thing is that in the USSR, a law was the Law and today it is worth no more than hay.” (Lentekhi forestry official).

“During the USSR the Law was in action and today the Law exists but it does not act.” (Oni SA participant).

46 Focus group participants identified a number of reasons why laws are not being enforced: 1) a largely uninformed public that is sometimes not aware of laws they are breaking; 2) corruption and mistrust of government; 3) lack of government capability due to shortage of resources, bad coordination and poor training; 4) lack of will to act against people who may need illegally-cut wood to survive; and 4) penalties that are too light. These reasons are addressed below.

It is difficult to enforce laws when the public depends on the forest so heavily for its heating and cooking needs, when it is so uninformed about the laws, and when it does not trust government information. Only a small number of people are aware of any GOG or local government activities to support forestry protection or development. Table 20 indicates that one percent or less of the general public knew without prompting about GOG’s export ban, any new law such as the Forest Code, or government-supported afforestation activities.

Table 20: Awareness of Government Forest management Activities Oni Ambrolauri Tsageri Lentekhi Average Not Aware of Any Activities 98% 98% 96.7% 98% 97.7% Aware of Export Ban 1.3% 0.7% 1.6% 0.7% 1% Aware of A New Rule 0.7% 0.7% 2% 0% 0.8% Aware of Spring Afforestation 0% 0.7% 0% 1.3% 0.6% Activity

Table 21 below indicates that the populations in the study area did not pay attention to the wide-ranging debate that occurred before and after passage of the new law. When asked specifically abut the new Forest Code, less than 10 percent recalled that it had been approved. No more than 15 percent of respondents in any area knew about the code and, of those, less than a third knew about even a single provision of the law.

Table 21: Knowledge of Government Forest Code Oni Ambrolauri Tsageri Lentekhi Average 1. Knew That New Forest Code 12.3% 6.9% 15.1% 4.7% 9.7% Passed 2. Aware of Any Specific Provisions 50% 0% 46.2% 0% 31.5% 3. Disagree With A Specific Provision 18.2% N/a 8.3% N/a 13% Exporting Wood Materials 1 N/a 0 N/a 0.5 Ecological Issues 1 N/a 0 N/a 0.5 More Afforestation Investment 0 N/a 1 N/a 0.5

Figures for Line 2 represent a subset of those people tallied in Line 1. Figures in Line 3 comprise a subset of the data in Line 2. For example, of the nearly 10 percent of people who knew a forest code had been passed, only about 1/3 were aware of any specific provisions of the code. So few people in the sample disagreed with the forestry policy that numbers in last 3 rows are absolute values rather than percentages.

47 The poorest households are least likely to know about existing forestry laws. Forty-nine percent of the poorest knew about the licensing law, as opposed to 71 percent of the least poor.

The public’s lack of knowledge about forestry-related laws is hurting voluntary compliance. When people learn of government action to improve forest management, most support it. It appears that GOG can help build consensus by publicizing better its legislative and regulatory activities. Table 21 above indicates that only a small proportion of those few people who were aware of specific provisions of the Forest Code disapproved of them (only one in six). Although few were aware of the ban on exports, the above table and data presented earlier all indicate widespread public support for such a ban. Table 22 below shows that the public has not had significant difficulties with government licensing regulations.

Table 22: Implementation of Wood Cutting Licensing Oni Ambrolauri Tsageri Lentekhi Average *Understand That License Required 75% 34% 67.8% 42.2% 52.8% Household Has License To Cut Wood 88.9% 82.4% 86.4% 48% 77.2% Problem Obtaining License 1.8% 3.6% 76.5% 8.3% 27% High Price Paid 100% 100% 89.7% 100% 90.7% Long Delays 0% 0% 7.7% 0% 1.9% Difficult to Say 0% 0% 2.6% 0% 0.7% Problem Using License 0% 7.1% 3.9% 12.5% 4.5% Land Described in License Not 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Available for Wood Cutting * This percentage is of those households that reported cutting wood, not of all households surveyed.

Most households have licenses to cut wood and report only a few problems in obtaining licenses or using them – the glaring exception is Tsageri, where people feel license fees are very high. The small number of people who have problems using the licenses report that the land described in the license is not actually available for cutting wood, indicating a license program management problem. Focus group participants state that forest felling violations occur largely due to the inability to pay for tickets. In the presence of a barter economy, many people simply do not have the cash to pay for a license. However, some believe paying for tickets should not pose difficulties to anyone.

“There are cases when people are pay in kind for tickets, for example with potatoes or beans.” (62-year old female from Oni).

“When a person is preparing to cut trees he is gathering money for fuel and food, and he doesn’t consider buying a forest ticket to be an important thing. One cubic meter of wood costs 1.8 laris to fell: a person need approximately 18 laris worth of wood a year – everyone can pay this amount of money, but they don’t. The state should think about this: how to improve the mentality of the population, because these resources cannot be free of charge.” (45-year old male forester from Oni).

48 Forestry employees report that payment problems do occasionally cause conflict. For example, in the village of Chrebalo a peasant killed a forester over a wood dispute. Several clashes have occurred between fuel wood gatherers and park employees, resulting in one case of the hospitalization of a park guard. The wire fence protecting the park was destroyed once and windows in an administration building were broken. No telephones were functioning to inform the police.

Part of the cause of resistance to forestry laws and violence may be corruption of government officials and the lack of trust the public has in government information. Forestry employees earn very low salaries and most people depend on wood cutting for their survival. This combination engenders corruption. As presented in Table 22 above, 38 percent of respondents said that “government politics,” (for example, bribes) is a cause of forestry degradation. Focus groups in Oni and Tsageri reported that foresters in their districts were not accepting bribes, but most participants expressed the belief that foresters and especially forestry officials working elsewhere were corrupt. Urban respondents expressed cynicism that any sector in Georgia could be free of corruption. One forester interviewed admitted to accepting a bribe to earn a living, receiving one time 15 – 20 laris (US$8 – 11). This amount is about equal to the average forester’s monthly salary, which is usually 18 – 30 laris (US$9 – 16) – if the forester is paid at all. In effect, this forester was paid more to not do his job than to do his job.

“In the mountainous regions the population is cutting the forest for survival purposes, but the income from the lumber trade goes to the local governments, criminals and the police.” (male government/NGO focus group participant).

“ The police are more corrupted than the foresters.” (general population focus group participant).

“The members of the police and ecological police forces are willing to ignore any violations in exchange for US$50. The park workers are on unpaid leave. Although the administration is in the position to carry out everything by itself, to guard and to work, the director is rather passive: he does not do anything to improve the situation or try to rescue the trees and plants.” (male in-depth interview participant).

Government officials may be somewhat apathetic to, or numbed by, the corruption. Some of them stated that corruption is the least significant problem facing the forests.

“People are cutting the forests because they have no other means of survival – so corruption is not critical in this case. Forest devastation is part of the larger situation.” (government/NGO focus group participant).

The existence of corruption breeds a lack of trust by the population in their government and less respect for its laws. Table 23 below indicates that the general population has the least faith in information coming from government agencies, whether it is from national or provincial organizations and literature or from local forest managers.

49 Table 23: Trust In Information Sources Oni Ambrolaur Tsageri Lentekhi Average i Television 49.1% 47.1% 86% 61.7% 61.9% Family or Friends 25% 23.7% 5.8% 6.7% 16% Newspapers 5.2% 13.4% 4.1% 5% 6.9% Radio 4.3% 5.2% 2.5% 13.3% 5.3% Neighbors 2.6% 7.2% 0% 8.3% 3.8% Natural Resources Mgmnt. Agencies 4.3% 0% 0% 3.3% 1.8% Private Conservation Organizations 2.6% 0% 0% 0% 0.8% Brochures 0% 0% 0.8% 0% 0.3% Forest Managers 0% 1% 0% 0% 0.3% Trust None 6.9% 2.1% 0.8% 1.7% 3%

NGOs share the public’s mistrust of government information as indicated below.

“ The data supplied by the Forestry Department is false. They cannot control illegal forest cuts and say that the situation is satisfactory, while the reality is in fact critical.” (female NGO focus group participant).

The public has a strong incentive to engage in activities that degrade Georgia’s forests and they often do not know they are violating laws. Additionally, their attitude towards some government officials makes them less likely to adhere to laws when they know about them. Against this very difficult situation is a government that lacks the capability to regulate forest resources even under the best conditions. GOG lacks the resources to implement and enforce laws effectively. Personnel and equipment are in short supply and personnel suffer delayed payments of salaries and inadequate training. In many cases, local representatives stated that their departments are unable to perform their duties due to lack of funds.

A fundamental problem is the distribution of central government funds to municipalities. Local governments often receive money months after it is needed. The Svaneti forestry department is now in court against the Tax Inspector’s office over budget issues. There is nostalgia for the Soviet era, when new laws passed in Moscow were accompanied by resources to implement them. Now, new laws are approved and severe government budget deficits curtail funding to implement them. Additionally, when local forestry departments serve as divisions of the central government, as many do, they function in an atmosphere of isolation and constraint. Cut off from information and other benefits of cooperation, they are less effective with the small amount of funding they do have. Some local forestry officials feel that wood-felling licensing should be regulated on a local level to improve enforcement and accountability. Fees collected through regulation of forestry activity could increase local budgets and their law enforcement capabilities significantly.

Training of forestry personnel is another significant obstacle to better enforcement of existing laws. The SA found that Environmental Protection Service inspectors had only a vague conceptual idea of the Forest Code. One inspector said that a legal entity must have 12 types of

50 documents to cut a tree, but he could not identify the documents. He said that without all 12 documents, all cut wood is officially confiscated (he only smiled when asked where this wood is kept). Many NGO representatives feel it is crucial to educate forestry employees about the laws and other forestry issues. Some respondents advocate workshops and seminars to improve the legal knowledge of Georgian forestry officials. However, directors of municipal forestry departments report that their foresters are highly skilled but they lack proper information resources – nothing is being done to provide information about legal codes to local forestry officials.

Government agencies have difficulty enforcing Georgia’s forestry laws also because of poor inter-governmental coordination. As noted earlier, disputes between municipal and GOG agencies are common, even entering the court system.

“ Disputes among the [state] authorities are quite common, and that is explained by incompetence.” (male government/NGO focus group participant).

The role of the state in managing forest resources is not well defined. Government officials gave conflicting views about government’s role, depending on their role and location. As noted in the stakeholder section, GOG is responsible simultaneously for preserving forests as well as utilize it for resources. While these separate missions can be reconciled with proper forest management, they can cause confusion among employees about government’s proper role. According to focus groups, when government agencies cooperate, as the Forestry Department and the ecological police have done, law enforcement is more efficient. Tighter control and more integrated cooperation over felling limits are needed. Limits vary widely depending on location and circumstances.

“ In mountainous regions norms should be 15 cubic meters, while in plane lands only five cubic meters.” (male focus group participant).

A fourth reason identified by the SA for inadequate government enforcement is the lack of government will to enforce laws. Corruption was addressed earlier. In addition, forestry officials understandably have soft hearts. They know many people depend on cutting wood – legally or illegally – to survive. When they see their neighbor cutting wood illegally, some have reported difficulty stopping them.

“When the people are born close to the forest it’s difficult to limit their forest cuts – cutting timber is not a sport or entertainment, it’s a matter of survival.” (58-year old male forester).

Finally, penalties and fines for illegally cutting wood are low and do not deter cutting as effectively as they could. Currently, the fine is the same regardless of the number of offenses – the fine equals the value of the wood cut. Forestry violations exceeding 400 laris are treated as criminal offenses. Under the Soviet Union, penalties for cutting wood illegally increased with successive violations. Some officials advocate returning to a similar system.

51 Roads and Forestry Degradation. GOG also needs to organize to improve roads in forestry areas. A small number of residents of the study areas believe that improving the transportation system, particularly roads, is important in improving forest management. The inadequate road system makes it very difficult to properly manage forest growth and cutting. A state-employed academic reports that a large portion of firewood cut by the population in mountainous regions is left to waste due to lack of transportation. Further, lack of transportation is a major impediment for the most poor obtaining employment and earning income, which, in turn, increases wood cutting for fuel wood. Consequently, inadequate roads are inflating demand for fuel wood.

“ Some incompetent people say that the nonexistence of roads has preserved our forests. That’s not true. Road non-existence creates wild forests. If you have no access to the forest and cannot implement selected cuts, then you cannot perform afforestation, and you cannot take care of the forest.” (male participant in government/NGO workshop).

Eighty-five percent of Georgian forests are dispersed on mountain slopes. Without the roads or equipment to air-lift timber cuts, loggers are cutting trees and rolling the timber down mountain sides and hills to areas where trucks can pick them up. Rolling logs down hillsides damages saplings and tears up underbrush and soils. Future generations of timber are sacrificed for near-term cutting. Additionally, under these conditions, rain/snow and gravity are causing severe erosion, mudslides and avalanches. Two thousand households have already moved to safer locations from Khulo, Shuakhevi, Grdabani and the lower Kartli region. Lentekhi, Svaneti and the villages of Melua, Djugareta and Kheledta are also experiencing problems. Water springs are being filled and destroyed. The impact on the entire ecosystem is profound, as people lose or fear losing their homes and livelihoods, the life-cycle of forests is interrupted, animal populations lose their normal habitats and food supplies.

Healthcare Problems

The poverty and general economic duress that most of the population is experiencing is detracting from their health. Although not everyone is affected, deteriorating health and medical services is a very serious problem for a significant minority. Table 24 below indicates that individual health is a top problem for about four percent of the population and seven percent feel it is a top problem for their village.

Table 24: Health As 1 of 3 Most Serious Problems Oni Ambrolauri Tsageri Lentekhi Average Inadequate Village Healthcare 3% 3.7% 14.3% 6.4% 7% Individual Family Health Problems 4.7% 2.7% 4.3% 3.7% 3.9% Inadequate Individual Healthcare 1.9% 2.4% 4% 3.9% 3.1% Unsafe Village Sanitation 0.2% 0% 0% 0.5% 0.2%

More than 1/3 of the population believes that health of their family members has worsened over the past five years, including about 50 percent of the residents of Oni and Tsageri. Table 25 below indicates that, for those with deteriorating health, 2/3 blame bad economic

52 conditions (general economic conditions, psychological stress, and insufficient and poor quality food). Only about seven percent blame deteriorating healthcare services and less than one percent blame poor infrastructure (water and sanitation). These data indicate that the poverty and subsistence living currently experienced by the population is directly affecting the health of a significant minority. It appears that adverse economic conditions are particularly hard on Ambrolauri, which has the largest elderly population. Focus group discussions indicate that the dependence on wood cutting to fuel heat and cooking is also detracting from the population’s health. Unlawful and, therefore, unregulated felling practices have increased, contributing to increases in logging accidents, which are often fatal.

53 Table 25: Health of Family Members Over Past 5 Years Oni Ambrolauri Tsageri Lentekhi Average Improved 2.7% 3.3% 2% 2.7% 2.7% Remained the Same 47.3 76% 49.3% 62% 58.7% % Worsened 50% 20.7% 48.7% 35.3% 38.7% Worsening Economic 37.4 7% 47.7% 33% 36.4% Conditions % Aging 36.6 62.8% 10.6% 32.1% 29.9% % Psychological Stress 13.7 14% 7.6% 11.6% 11.2% % Insufficient Food 3.1% 0% 26.3% 6.3% 11% Reduced Quality Healthcare 2.3% 14% 4.5% 14.3% 7.4% Poor Quality Food 5.3% 0% 3% 1.8% 3.1% Poor Quality Drinking Water 0.8% 2.3% 0% 0% 0.5% Inadequate Sanitation 0.8% 0% 0% 0% 0.2%

Insufficient Credit

The principal cause of excessive wood cutting is the lack of alternative fuels to heat homes and cook food. This, in turn, is due to lack of income to purchase alternative fuels and, to a lesser extent, the lack of alternative fuels available. Likewise, the major contributor to declining health and healthcare services is lack of income. Job-creation and income-generation are critical to addressing concerns about excessive wood cutting and alternative fuels. Consequently, credit is a major social development issue.

Unfortunately, very few Georgians are currently accessing credit. Less than two percent of SA respondents had obtained a credit in the 12 months prior to the study. It appears that lack of credit is a major obstacle to addressing excessive use of forest resources and declining health conditions. The households that cut wood to sell are least likely to have employment problems and are most likely to want to start a business involving forest resources. Therefore, they may be the best prospects for targeted micro-lending.

Out-migration

“If you still are able to see young people here that’s because they have no money to travel - but they all wish to go and find a better life.” (Male, 26 years old, Oni).

There is a joke circulating among Georgia’s urban youth: How can you tell you’re a Georgian? You’re always talking about how you live in the greatest country in the world - but you can’t wait to leave. Focus group members reported that the issue of migration was painful for them and their provinces. Poverty and unemployment are the basic root causes of migration in Georgia’s rural regions, and youth are most likely to leave. Of those households that had lost members to

54 migration, about 44 percent said the absent member left in search of work elsewhere in Georgia or in a foreign country. Figure 1 shows that, outside of marriage, finding work was the primary reason for out-migration. Only about 35 percent of the household members surveyed in Racha, Svaneti and Lechkhumi thought that their children would remain in their villages.

Figure 1

W HY HOUS EHOLD MEMBERS MIGRATE D FROM V ILLAGE S

7.7 4.4 11.4 9.9 11.5 7.6 11 9.7 16.4 19.8

31.8 42.8 42.6

60.4

41.6 38.1 31.1

ONI AMBROLAURI TSAGE RI LENTE KHI MARRIAGE WORK (IN GEORGIA) WORK (IN OTHER COUNTRY) EDUCATION INSTABILITY IN REGION

While there were reports that most migrants hope to return to their homes and their families in the future, majorities in Oni and Tsageri reported that the chances for the return of those who have left are slim. The groups cited the lack of improvement in living conditions and employment opportunities as reasons why migrants will not return.

This large out-migration has four implications. First, village demographics are changing. For example, in the Oni district 280 of more than 300 Jewish families have left since the early 1990s. And while participants in Tsageri reported that they have observed the return of some of their migrants in recent years, these returnees were largely the elderly, who returned to their villages to seek land allocation. Accordingly, about 36 percent of the population in Racha, Svaneti and Lechkhumi is over the age of 55, and only about 17 percent are under 26 years of age.

Second, the out-migration will continue to help cushion the poverty experienced by most households as they receive remittances from family members who have left. The section on poverty illustrated how dependent households in the study areas are on family remittances for income – this will likely continue.

Third, economic growth will be slowed as fewer and fewer young workers remain to power an agricultural-based economy. Finally, the elderly will feel more pressure as fewer children and grandchildren are available to help find, cut and gather fuel wood, manage their agricultural plots and support other labor-intensive work.

55 Public Participation

Many residents in the study areas are excluded from social, economic, and political activities and government decision-making. They lack even basic information and they distrust some of the sources of information they use. All but the wealthiest and most educated SA participants are isolated and constrained by lack of information and opportunities to participate in government decision- making and natural resource management activities.

Such exclusion makes it very difficult for the government to address forestry sustainability and management issues. Those most in need of information are most difficult to reach and influence. Yet, without the active participation of the general population, few government initiatives will succeed in resolving the significant forestry degradation issues confronting it. Residents in the study areas need expanded employment opportunities and increased incomes to finance use of alternative energy supplies, but few know the potential opportunities to access these opportunities. They need to understand and support government forest management policies and laws to mitigate or reverse continue over-cutting of forest supplies, yet many are not aware of these policies and laws. SA participants need transportation and marketing assets to take advantage of employment opportunities that they do find, but most lack access to them as well.

Overcoming these factors of social exclusion can possibly yield profound benefits, as SA participants appear to be eager to participate in natural resource management and government decision-making, and most support government laws, regulations and activities when they learn about them.

Lack of Information

This paper addressed earlier the lack of public knowledge about GOG laws, regulations and activities. Few Georgians covered in the SA knew much about government activities or forest management issues generally. They know little because they do not receive a sufficient amount of information and they do not believe most of the information they do receive. Table 27 indicates that more than half of the sample is not satisfied with the forestry information they receive. Only residents in Tsageri are more satisfied than not, a reflection of higher income and educational levels in that study area. The large majorities in the other three areas want better information.

Table 27: Satisfaction in How Forestry Information is Received Oni Ambrolauri Tsageri Lentekhi Average Satisfied 16.7% 23.7% 56.2% 16.7% 30.6% Not Satisfied 74.6% 51.5% 30.6% 71.7% 54.8% No Opinion 8.8% 24.7% 13.2% 11.7% 14.5%

Surprisingly, television is used most to obtain information, but radio, newspapers, friends and neighbors are equally important (table 28). In many countries in the region, friends and families are considerably more important conduits of information for people. A variety of factors could cause the relatively low reliance on friends and neighbors for information, but most likely it is due to the overall lack of any information available to rural inhabitants. The information habits of Lentekhi residents are

56 indicative of extreme exclusion -- about half of Lentekhi residents say they never receive any information.

Table 28: Methods of Receiving Information Oni Ambrolauri Tsageri Lentekhi Average Television 36.1% 29.8% 47.1% 21.7% 34.4% Radio 6.3% 10.9% 18.2% 11.7% 11.7% Newspaper 9.9% 12.8% 11.2% 5% 10.1% Family and/or Friends 19.8% 12.4% 7% 3.3% 11.3% Neighbors 9.5% 13.2% 3.3% 5.6% 8.2% Never Receive Information 13.5% 20.5% 12% 50% 22.1% Other 4.9% 0.4% 1.2% 2.7% 2.2%

Table 29: Trust In Information Sources Oni Ambrolaur Tsageri Lentekhi Average i Television 49.1% 47.1% 86% 61.7% 61.9% Family or Friends 25% 23.7% 5.8% 6.7% 16% Newspapers 5.2% 13.4% 4.1% 5% 6.9% Radio 4.3% 5.2% 2.5% 13.3% 5.3% Neighbors 2.6% 7.2% 0% 8.3% 3.8% Natural Resources Mgmnt. Agencies 4.3% 0% 0% 3.3% 1.8% Private Conservation Organizations 2.6% 0% 0% 0% 0.8% Brochures 0% 0% 0.8% 0% 0.3% Forest Managers 0% 1% 0% 0% 0.3% Trust None 6.9% 2.1% 0.8% 1.7% 3%

The relatively broad use of television is a reflection of both trust in its information and relatively good access. It is a far superior way of reaching residents of the study areas than other mass media such as radios and newspapers.

Households that cut wood primarily for sale are generally better informed about forest issues than those who cut wood for fuel (24 percent were familiar with the Forest Code compared to six percent of those who cut fuelwood). They derive more information from television and generally trust such information more.

Lack of Participation

Given the lack of knowledge demonstrated by the public about forestry resource issues, it is not surprising that there is little participation in forest management or any other aspect of forest-related activities. The SA found that respondents want to participate in management of forest resources, but few have to date. Table 30 below shows that GOG has not encouraged their participation. Among survey respondents, very few (less than one percent) of the people in Lentekhi have been asked by a government official to participate.

57 Table 30: Government Encouragement of Participation (Have national, state or communal forest management authorities asked for your opinion or help?) Oni Ambrolauri Tsageri Lentekhi Average Yes 0% 0% 0% 0.7% 0.2% No 100% 100% 100% 99.3% 99.8%

The SA found that conditions are ripe to engage the population as assets in managing forests proactively. As Table 31 below indicates, most people (about 66 percent) feel that the public has a role to help manage forest resources and very few people (about five percent) believe it should have no role. In contrast, few members of households have actually participated in such activities.

Table 31: Participation by Population in Forest management Yes No Don’t Know Should Villagers Participate? 66.3% 4.7% 28% Have You Participated in Past 5 Years? 20.2% 79.8% N/A

Of the 20 percent of households which said they participated in forest management, a third planted and grew seedlings and a sixth built roads in forest areas. A very small number participated in fire prevention, erosion control and pest management activities. Only a couple households participated in logging or clear felling.

“ In recent years the population has started to realize how critical the situation is with the forests. They have even blocked the roads to trucks transporting timber, but the population itself is cutting the forest for self- consumption.” (female participant in government/NGO focus group).

Despite their belief that the general population should participate in forest management, many are not clear what individual citizens can do collectively to address forestry degradation. Nearly 40 percent do not know what it can do to help or believe that nothing can be done individually to help. An additional 20 percent do not have an opinion beyond “taking care of our resources.” Thus, less than half of the SA participants have specific opinions. Table 32 below shows that this minority believes that there are ways to mitigate forestry degradation on both the supply side and demand side.

58 Table 32: Actions Public Should Take to Address Problems Action Oni Ambrolaur Tsageri Lentekhi Average i Don’t Know 1.2% 37.7% 39.5% 43.8% 30.1% We Can Do Nothing 16% 9.7% 1.3% 4.6% 8.1% Take Care of Our Resources 29.6% 6.5% 21.1% 26.4% 20.9% Afforestation 16% 34.4% 7.2% 13.1% 17.7% Don’t Cut Without License 13% 9.1% 17.1% 4.6% 11% Ban Exports to Other Rayons 8.6% 0% 2.6% 0% 2.9% Make Alternative Fuels Cheaper 0.6% 0.6% 0.7% 4.6% 1.6% Improve Soil Quality 4.9% 0.6% 0.7% 0% 1.6% Build Roads 4.3% 0% 0% 0% 1.1% Prevent Fires & “Clean” Forest 1.2% 0% 2.6% 0% 1% Other (9 solutions each < 1%) 4.6% 1.4% 7.2% 2.9% 4%

Nearly half of this minority believes that they can help solve forest degradation through afforestation or improving solid quality. The other half believes the solution lies on the demand side, favoring reductions in cutting and exports, finding alternative fuel sources, and helping to prevent forest fires. In summary, many people believe they should participate in forest management, but they need to be organized and lead to actually involve themselves in these activities to any significant degree.

Lack of Knowledge

The lack of knowledge and/or participation in forest resources issues inhibits the ability to access resources that can sustain families. Creation of jobs and income-generating opportunities is impeded by, among many factors, lack of credit and marketing facilities. Exploiting job and income opportunities is impeded by lack of access to transportation, healthcare and alternative energy supplies that free up time and productive capacity. The lack of knowledge by the population may preclude their participation in important policy decisions, laws, and regulations affecting access to the resources that can most help them.

Access to Employment and Income Opportunities. The key social development issue of poverty pervades Georgia’s population and is critical to the health of its forest resources. The social isolation experienced by SA respondents has resulted in subsistence living based on household plots and forest gathering for food and woodcutting for heating and cooking needs. The resulting prevalence of barter and the time required to cultivate food and collect fuelwood usually precludes people from looking for more productive economic activities or learning new work skills. Those with superior skills are most likely to migrate to other regions of Georgia or to foreign countries.

One in four respondents (26 percent) expressed interest in starting their own business, a surprising number given the poverty they are generally experiencing. Such people are usually those who already have work and who are more entrepreneurial. Households who cut wood for sale are more entrepreneurial than other groups. They are more likely to express interest in starting a business that utilizes forest resources (48 percent compared to 28 percent of fuelwood cutters), particularly those in Tsageri and Lentekhi.

59 Most of these households (57 percent) are interested in starting a business favor activities that nurture forest resources – beekeeping and nurseries, while others are interested in tourism and hunting services, which would require healthy forests to sustain.6 Other entrepreneurial activities of interest are weaving, mineral water, wine, silk and fruit preserves. People interested in many of these activities could significantly benefit from programs to support small business and such assistance could help improve forests. Microcredit programs to help them initiate commercial utilization of sustainable forest resources would best serve them. From a natural resource management perspective, such credits could be as an alternative to financing commercial cutting activities.

“We have a lot of natural forests that are rich with native mushrooms and wild ancestors of cultural crops. This is an enormous wealth that should be utilized in the food programs. If industrial forest cuts are introduced, as in Europe, these varieties will disappear from our ecosystem.” (female NGO representative).

A corollary problem is the impact of poverty and subsistence living on the health of some people, particularly the most poor in Oni and the poor and elderly in Ambrolauri. Adverse economic conditions (unemployment, lack of income, poor quality food and psychological stress).

Access to Credit. Few members of the SA study have borrowed money as low income, scarce income-generation opportunities and the barter economy prevents access to credit. Availing microcredit to the most entrepreneurial households covered above can enable them to participate in the cash economy, create income and new jobs that engender economic growth.

Lack of Marketing Capacity. Villagers generally lack the resources and infrastructure necessary to market the goods they harvest, raise and cultivate. The most profitable sectors are livestock, honey, cultivation and jonjoli collection and preparation. But storage centers for these and other products such as mushrooms, nuts, berries and medical herbs do not exist.

“Forestry connected to agricultural development: this will improve our forest management. Furthermore, the population needs to be provided with marketing services that will help move things along.” (male government official).

Accessing Transportation. Transportation difficulties are one of the top problems of the population. Accessing transportation will be very important to nurturing employment in the study areas. To the extent transportation problems cannot improve, job creation must focus on an extremely local level.

Accessing Forest Resources. Previous sections have shown how a strong majority of the general population support the views of environmental NGOs and many government officials that forest resources are being degraded and must be protected through improved licensing laws

6 Beekeeping is practiced in some villages in Lentekhi. Their honey is considered especially healthy and receives relatively high prices. However, beekeeping equipment is commercially unavailable in the area and in 1997 an unidentifiable plague wiped out many domestic bees.

60 and better enforcement of existing rules. Only about eight percent of respondents felt that licensing regulations unduly constrained their use of forest resources – predominantly in Tsageri, and usually due to high prices for tickets. This figure may be much higher if the laws were enforced more carefully. However, there is potential danger in curtailing forest resources too much or in the wrong way as so many people depend on such resources for fuel and energy needs.

The poorest households, those cutting wood for fuel, those receiving income from selling fuel wood and those which use forest resources for grazing livestock are more likely to oppose further restrictions of cutting or enforcement of existing laws. These households feel they need the additional income from wood and livestock to survive.

The poorest households are least likely to support further restrictions or enforcement of licensing laws. They are less likely to blame excessive fuel wood cuts for deterioration forest resources and are more likely to blame adverse weather conditions. These households generally know least about the issues and are most difficult to reach with information. They are less likely to hold wood cutting licenses and, therefore, increased enforcement of licensing laws would adversely affect them as a group more. Their extreme poverty make them less likely to adopt alternative fuels due to the lack of appropriate equipment and the comparatively larger expense involved.

Seventy-five percent of households cutting wood for sale blamed government restrictions for curtailing their use of the forest compared to 49 percent of those cutting wood for fuel. These households are more likely found in Tsageri and less likely to be in Ambrolauri. Households cutting wood for sale are as likely to be involved agricultural production as fuelwood cutters, but they are more likely to report decreased agricultural production (64 percent compared to 44 percent). Households that cut wood for sale are generally more discontented than other groups, and they often blame government actions for this discontentment. Wealthier households are more likely to support cutbacks in fuel wood cutting and are most amenable to purchasing alternative fuel supplies if they are available and affordable.

Forestry officers are also reported to discourage secondary uses of forests such as collection of foods such as mushrooms, berries, herbal medicines, etc. But the SA found no reason to preclude use of forests for these secondary food gathering activities. Proper use of forest resources can greatly help support households without degrading forest resources.

Privatizing or Preserving Forests. Georgians have been debating whether to privatize the forests. Those favoring privatization, who were in the minority of those participating in focus groups, believe that privatization will improve forestry conditions because individuals are more likely to take better care of forests they own and accept responsibility for their condition. Those who want the state to maintain control, who were in the majority of focus group participants and government officials interviewed, believe that privatization would accelerate degradation of forests. Private individuals would use forest resources for short-term gain for themselves rather than the long-term needs of society.

61 The ownership status of the forests is very important to the many households who now use forests to collect fuel wood or to graze livestock. The ratio of state forest lands to private forest lands utilized by SA participants is very large – 14 to one. If these forests are privatized, many households could lose access to them for collecting fuel wood or grazing livestock – either through prohibition or by being charged an unaffordable cost for collecting wood or grazing.

Private interests have been very aggressive in utilizing private land and defending their control over them. For example, currently the conflict between Chakharesheli and Zhakhunderi local administrations over the Laparuri pastures and grasslands has caused families to fight each other. Similarly aggressive action to control private forests and profit from them could result from forestry privatization. The loss of privatized forest land to collect fuel wood may – or may not – slow the degradation of forests from fuel wood collection. But it would be a social disaster for the large majority of residents that depend on state lands to heat their homes and cook their food. Likewise, focus groups say that the number of livestock they keep is decreasing because the food yields from forests are falling. This indicates that if livestock owners are cut off from state forest resources, livestock supplies for households could drop further.

Alternatively, there has been some discussion to set aside state forests as parks, preserves and protected areas. Surrounding populations could also be hurt significantly if these areas are restricted from public use of their resources (wood, livestock grazing, secondary food collection, etc.). As the vast majority (85 percent) of respondents engage in agricultural production, expanding the amount of land under protection could cause widespread difficulties. This is already happening in some places. In Oni, oak and beech trees are now officially protected. Because most of the trees growing near local populations are oaks and beeches, people living in the area have virtually no legal access to wood. These issues are particularly important to focus group participants from Oni and, especially Tsageri, where workable land is scarce and soil quality has declined recently.

Some of those participating in government and NGO focus groups believe that linking agricultural sectors with national parks, nature preserves and protected areas would serve to protect forests and nurture their sustainable development. Others believe that the agricultural sector and the forestry sector are competitive – helping one could hurt the other.

“ Due to the creation of Borjomi-Kharagauli Park, the population will be deprived of their traditional sources of income: livestock breeding, apiculture, and jonjoli picking.” (male government/NGO focus group participant).

“If nature reserves and protected areas develop, a lot of forestry agriculture sectors may disappear because they hinder forest protection.” (male government/NGO focus group participant).

Some noted that commercial livestock and cattle breeding already exist in some forest districts and such activity helps sustainable forest development in some ways but could also lead to soil erosion in forests already weakened by other factors. But where the population has little personal land, prohibiting or restricting grazing on protected areas could place undue hardship on livestock owners -- virtually every family has some livestock and it is a very important staple or supplement to those who cannot afford food or can only barely afford food.

62 Institutional and Organizational Issues

The study areas lack the proper institutional and organizational capacity in two fundamental areas – government and civil society. The public lacks grassroots, voluntary social organization to address pressing needs involving information gathering, income/employment generation and energy generation. This lack of capacity places additional burden on governmental support functions. For its part, GOG and municipal governmental organizations lack the capacity to meet this burden. The absence of adequate institutional and organizational capacity is crippling Georgia’s ability to address poverty and forest management issues.

Weak Government Organization

The government’s functional deficiencies are a key social development issue addressed earlier. These functional deficiencies are rooted in weak coordination capacity, over-centralization, inadequate personnel management systems, non-existent or antiquated management information systems (MIS), and weak communications and public outreach capabilities. These institutional and organizational shortcomings undermine critical missions such as law enforcement, wood-cutting licensing administration and road-building.

Lack of Coordination Capacity. GOG acted positively in 1996 when it established the Forestry Commission to coordinate forest management-related issues under the central direction of the President. However, a large number of government agencies are directly involved in some aspect of forest management and the SA found near universal opinion that coordination of these bodies remains weak.

GOG’s capacity to coordinate its various functions and agencies needs improvement. A fundamental issue is the often inherent tension between forestry preservation and forestry exploitation. Proper forest management policies and implementation can minimize this tension, but they will always exist. Responsibilities for these two missions within the GOG’s forest management diaspora are not clearly delineated, and this can create confusion about missions and policies and slow decision-making. Another fundamental issue is incorporation of perspectives that fall outside Georgia’s traditional forest management network – energy and transportation. These two areas are critical to alleviating poverty and properly sustaining forest resources. They need to be represented adequately in poverty and forest management decision-making.

Centralization. Ironically, despite coordination problems, GOG’s forest management is overly centralized. The SA found diverse conditions and interests in the four geographic areas it studied. A single, national implementation of forestry policies and programs is likely to be sub- optimal. Government policies and programs need to be implemented and tailored to localities to meet differing conditions and needs. Additionally, resources to implement the new Forest Code and various forest management programs, including wood-cutting licensing, at local levels are not sufficient. GOG’s budget allocation needs to be decentralized to place appropriate resources to local government agencies so that they can properly implement GOG policies and programs. GOG should also permit locales more flexibility – combined with strong central oversight – in managing revenue raising through forestry-use fees, violation penalties, etc., and allow locales to retain a significant

63 portion of these revenues to spend on forest management. The need to decentralize management places a premium in addressing existing weaknesses in government coordination described above.

Inadequate MIS. The SA found a fundamental lack of information with which to make decisions and implement them. There is consensus among government officials and NGOs that better information is required to improve the speed and quality of decision-making and rebuild trust among the stakeholders. Data collection, dissemination and analysis currently cannot support GOG’s decision-making needs. Strengthening MIS will help enable GOG to decentralize forest management functions even as it improves coordination capacity.

Deficient Communications. The Georgian people know little about forest management issues and do not trust what they hear. GOG is not adequately disseminating the small amount of information it does have and the information it is provide is not credible to the public.

Weak Staffing. GOG’s forest management officials face daunting challenges but do not have the personnel management systems to meet them. As described earlier, Georgia lacks an adequate number of forest managers and related personnel to cover its forest resources. It also woefully underpays them and frequently does not pay them on time. Additionally, they are not adequately trained, particularly in the basics of the laws and regulations they are supposed to implement. The combination of personnel, income and training shortages makes it extremely difficult to manage forests properly – without or without the deficiencies elsewhere described.

Wood Cutting Licensing Administration. The system is problematic in terms of accountability and accuracy. State forest management districts are now responsible for selling wood cutting tickets, which may present a conflict of interest and unduly expose the program to ticket sales manipulation, especially if commercial logging is resumed. Additionally, a significant minority of people were receiving licenses to cut wood in areas that forestry officials stated are, in fact, off limits to wood cutting. This administrative problem may be related to the fact that, in some locales, licenses were sold for quantities of wood that far exceed targeted cutting quotas. These deficiencies severely limit GOG’s ability to manage forest resources.

Lack of Social Infrastructure and Civic Institutions

The populations in the study areas are effectively excluded from Georgia’s government generally, forest management activities in particular. Their social isolation greatly impedes Georgia’s ability to address poverty and manage forests properly. People in the study areas lack the civic institutions that help alleviate poverty and which, in turn, would help slow forest exploitation and improve forest management. They also lack institutions by which they can contribute to the proper management of forest resources. The dearth of civic institutions also limits GOG’s ability to communicate with and mobilize its citizens.

Forest Management Organizations. The SA found that people are greatly concerned about forest management issues and most want to participate directly in forest management activities. Nonetheless, the institutions through which they can participate often do not exist in their communities. Hunters’ unions have declined precipitously and environmental NGOs are not present in many locations and sometimes are not seen as friendly to local interests. The study areas lack the

64 type of institutions that can channel their energies to increase the benefits they receive from the forests while decreasing the damage done to them.

CHAPTER 4: IMPLICATIONS OF SOCIAL ASSESSMENT FOR PROJECT DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION

The Georgia Forests Development Project (GFDP) seeks to improve GOG’s management of national forest resources in a socially acceptable way. The SA found that the principal threat to forest resources is the excessive cutting of trees, primarily to meet heating and cooking needs, and the inability of government to develop, implement and enforce clear forest management laws, regulations, policies and programs. The GFDP must help reduce excessive wood cutting, improve forest management, and protect a highly vulnerable population (socially and economically) – while under conditions of extremely tight government revenue constraints. This is a formidable challenge.

The SA recommends a set of measures to meet this challenge while improving the social conditions of the general population, especially the most vulnerable. These measures are a mixture of the creative and the traditionally reliable. Essentially, the goal is to substitute relatively abundant assets for relatively scarce assets to overcome social and economic obstacles and jumpstart socially and environmentally sensitive economic growth. The general population has a large number of people. They lack money and means to heat their homes and cook their food. GOG lacks money and people but has consensus among Georgian citizens that forest resources need to be utilized wisely and receive protection over the long-term. NGOs have much expertise and will but lack a clear role in Georgia’s current forest management plans which is acceptable to GOG and the general population. The following measures are recommended for consideration by GOG and managers of the GFDP to utilize these balances of resources to the advantage of Georgia’s forests and its impoverished people.

Improve Government Enforcement

Current law enforcement is inadequate and adoption of the alternative fuel coupon program would increase incentives for wood-cutters to violate restrictions. Consequently, GOG must improve its enforcement of forestry laws and regulations, especially the wood-cutting licensing program. Improving law enforcement should include three components: (a) improving the coverage and effectiveness of all forestry officials, particularly those of local departments; (b) augment forest management by forestry officials with the direct help of the general population and NGOs; and (c) increase the penalties for violating forestry regulations, particularly wood-cutting restrictions.

Improve Coverage and Effectiveness of Forestry Officials. The SA found that forestry officials, particularly at local levels where most enforcement actions originate, lack the resources to enforce laws effectively. To improve the resource base and the ability of local departments to use those resources, the funds for forestry regulation enforcement should be moved to local offices along with decision-making powers to utilize this funding effectively. Local departments should also be able to retain a significant portion of the revenue earned from

65 local management of forestry operations. In exchange, they should accept strict oversight and accountability for how these funds are utilized and the results of their utilization.

With the improved resource base, forestry departments should pay forestry officials on time and, as the resource base improves in the medium- and long-terms, should increase pay scales to remain competitive with private sector opportunities. This will improve morale and contribute to improving respect of GOG by reducing the incentive to accept or solicit bribes from citizens. Forest management and enforcement officials should also receive on-going training in forest management, general management, and information dissemination and public relations.

Increase Penalties for Forestry-Related Violations. Some of the programs could be ineffective without stronger penalties for violations. The SA found that existing penalties are not deterring those who violate cutting restrictions.

Increase Employment and Income-Generating Opportunities

The incentives to adopt alternative heating and cooking fuels must be supported with increased opportunities of employment and income. Households are more likely to switch from wood-cutting to alternative fuel supplies if they can afford to do so. Three broad measures would support this objective: (a) improve access of citizens to available resources: (b) target lending and technical assistance to small businesses whose activities support sound forest management; and (c) educate commercial loggers and those who cut wood for sale on how to profit from healthy, sustainable management of forest resources.

Improving citizen access to resources would focus primarily on establishing or improving existing village market places/facilities. Such facilities should attract many people on a regular basis via business, entertainment, cultural, social and educational activities. Installing agricultural product storage and processing facilities would contribute to the marketing of agricultural products and raise income. Establishing alternative fuel equipment and supplies facilities would provide convenient access of suppliers and customers to each other. Both suppliers and customers would benefit from demonstrations and other information dissemination techniques focusing on the advantages of alternative fuels. Both citizens and banks would benefit if mirocredit lending facilities were established in these market places. The presentation of business, entertainment, cultural, social and educational activities at village market places would draw the population closer together, closer to the forests, and closer to those in government and NGOs. Economic activity would increase and employment and incomes would rise. As importantly, social interaction would increase, thereby increasing trust, building consensus, and improving voluntary compliance with forestry (and other) laws.

The SA also recommends that banks and government target those small business activities that support sound forest management with lending and technical assistance. Such businesses include beekeeping, nurseries and herbal medicines. From a natural resource management perspective, such credits could be used as an alternative to financing commercial cutting activities.

66 Improve Government Policy-Making and Implementation

Earlier sections on institutional, organizational and participation dimensions of Georgia’s forest management detailed government weaknesses. GOG has great potential to improve its ability to manage forest resources and nurture social development and economic growth simultaneously. It can do so by: (a) incorporating the general population, NGOs and commercial interests into policy discussions, decisions, reviews, implementation and monitoring; (b) clearly defining sustainable forestry development and develop appropriate policies to support it; (c) assigning clear roles and responsibilities for each of the agencies implementing policies; (d) improving the capacity to coordinate the newly clarified roles of these agencies to meet newly clarified sustainable forestry development objectives; (e) decentralizing forest management activities, including budgeting and administration, while increasing local accountability; (f) upgrading MIS capabilities to support greater decentralization and coordination needs; (g) improving dissemination and receipt of information to and from the stakeholders; and (h) improving human resources in terms of salaries, training, and numbers of employees.

Protect the Most Vulnerable

The campaign against excessive wood-cutting could hurt those who depend on forest resources most and the most vulnerable in the population. These people include the poorest, women, the elderly, youth, and residents of Ambrolauri and Lentekhi. The recommendations above – especially the information/education campaigns, making government more transparent and responsive to citizens, improvements in forest management practices, and implementing additional studies – help or accommodate the needs of the poorest and most vulnerable. Managers of all initiatives should carefully consider during planning stages the impact of their programs on these groups.

Study Additional Issues

This SA addresses many issues and covers much ground. However, further studies are vital to help GOG identify issues, develop solutions, obtain stakeholder consensus, and implementing appropriate measures. Such studies could include: (a) the types of alternative fuels most desired by household and the reasons why; (b) the ability and willingness of households to pay for alternative fuels; (c) how to distribute reliable but low-cost supplies of energy profitably at the retail level, including the potential for local manufacture of equipment and supplies; (d) a quantitative and systematic analysis of patterns of wood consumption and growth/decline of timber supplies by region and locale; (e) the risk of avalanches and mudslides to villages in vulnerable areas and potential solutions to mitigate these risks; (f) the negative and positive impacts of import and export restrictions on forestry resource management and the social structures that forest resources support; and (g) locations where roads are most needed to improve forest management capabilities and improve popular access to economic activities.

Ensure Appropriate Level of Public Participation

67 Effective implementation of the GFDP demands public trust and the coordinated participation of the population living in the target areas, government officials, NGOs, academic and private organizations, and law enforcement structures working in the field of forestry. The findings of the SA indicate that that the following needs to be undertaken to ensure that there is appropriate participation among the stakeholders.

Establish Trust

The state needs to establish trust among NGOs and the population. Accomplishing this will depend largely the transparency of the project planning process and the efforts of the state to address the concerns of the stakeholder groups. Towards this end it is recommended that the state: ensure that the planning and decision-making stages are as open and public as possible by encouraging media coverage, making information about the process publicly available and, when appropriate, holding open meetings and workshops; establish an ongoing method of soliciting and addressing the concerns of the various stakeholders, especially the concerns of the populations living in and around the targeted forests; and focus attention on building trust among the stakeholder groups that are inclined to distrust the state and its sincerity or capabilities; namely NGOs, hunters and households that cut fuel wood for profit.

Improve Communication among Stakeholders

This will involve methods of increasing open dialog and communication should be established. Component 2 requires that the state actively seek opinions and information from other stakeholders and within its own departmental structure. In addition, the state should increase the quantity and quality of information it provides. Towards this end, the SA recommends that the state establish an ongoing method of obtaining information and opinions from NGOs, the population, the commercial sector and the populations living in and around targeted forests; and NGOs should seek the opinions of the populations living in areas targeted by NGO activities or attention.

Increase Dissemination of Information

The quantity and quality of information available to the population needs to be improved. The effectiveness of this approach strongly depends on how accurately the information is targeted and whether or not it succeeds in reaching its audience. As previously mentioned in the stakeholder analysis, certain segments of the populations living in and around the studied areas could prove more difficult to reach by traditional information dissemination methods. To ensure the effectiveness of this component, it is recommended that: managers focus on reaching women living in the targeted areas; specifically, attention needs to be addressed on building an interest in forestry issues among women; and steps should be taken to ensure that the information reaches the poorest of households in the targeted areas. In addition to initiating an information dissemination plan, the overall availability of information should also be increased so that those who require detailed knowledge are able to obtain the information.

68 Participation Strategy

The ultimate goal of the participation plan should be to improve the ability and willingness of the various stakeholder groups to participate in the planning and implementation of sustainable forest management and development processes in an informed and constructive way. The participation of the populations living in the targeted areas is considered especially crucial for the success of the project in meeting the following objectives, as this stakeholder group is the most dependent on forest resources and thus the group that will be most directly affected by the project.

Development of a commercial sector based on sustainable forest utilization. This will require that commercial interests are encouraged, both financially and legally. It will also depend in large part on infrastructure improvements in the country and on the establishment of a general understanding and consensus on the sustainable development of Georgia’s forest. Public participation will be crucial to this component in that the support of local populations is needed to develop a viable forest-based commercial sector. Towards this end, it is recommended that: (a) the opinions of local populations be obtained to ensure that the potential employment opportunities for their regions are suitable to the populations’ capabilities and interests; and (b) the forest-based entrepreneurial interests of the local populations be encouraged both financially and legally.

Consensus building between stakeholder groups. This will require that communication between stakeholders is increased and the dissemination of information is improved. In order to achieve a real consensus among stakeholders, it is recommended that: (a) the concept of sustainable development as it pertains to Georgia’s forests and forest resources should be clearly and thoroughly defined; (b) the initial components of the project should be precisely identified; (c) the under-represented stakeholders, namely poor households, younger villagers, unemployed villagers and women living in the targeted areas, should be included in the communication and information dissemination processes to avoid excluding groups who will be affected by the implementation process.

Development of human resources. This refers primarily to state employees working in the forestry and natural resources fields. This component should ensure that these employees are provided with the opportunity to influence the direction their retraining will take. In addition, it should focus on building the municipal employees’ ability to work more closely with local populations. To ensure that the development of human resources positively impacts the targeted areas, it is recommended that: (a) foresters and municipal representatives receive training on information dissemination techniques aimed at educating and serving local populations; and (b) where new commercial sectors are developed, training opportunities should be made available to local populations to ensure that villagers are able to benefit from the increase in employment opportunities.

Increased understanding of sustainable forest management among the population. The effectiveness of this approach will depend in large part on whether or not the information provided reaches its target audience. Because a well-informed population will be a crucial factor in the overall success of the project, the successful dissemination of information should be made

69 a priority. Towards this end, it is recommended that: (a) information targeted at women living in or adjacent to forests should build on their interest in the traditional or local significance of forests and forest resources; (b) information targeted at the younger (under the age of 20) villagers living in or adjacent to forests should build on their interest in the local unavailability and high expense of fuel alternatives; (c) information targeted at the poorest of households should be made easily available in both written and spoken mediums (it was found that television would not be an effective medium through which to reach poorer households and it is recommended that electronic media sources not be utilized to target poor villagers); and (d) information targeted at households engaged in cutting fuel wood should be designed with the understanding that the majority of these households are too poor to afford fuel alternatives to wood; the economic and employment opportunities that could result from sustainable forest management and development, etc., should be stressed.

Reduced fuel wood dependence among the population. This will depend on a number of factors, including the availability of non-wood forms of fuel and the cost of these fuel alternatives compared to the relative economic conditions of the local population. In addition, it will hinge on the capabilities of local households to utilize non-wood fuels (ownership of electric heaters, gas stoves, etc.). To engage the population in efforts to reduce fuel wood consumption, it is recommended that: (a) economic and employment opportunities be increased to ensure that local populations are financially capable of reducing their fuel wood usage; (b) ownership of fuel wood versus non- wood burning stoves, ovens, heaters, etc. should be studied in the targeted areas and this information should be taken into account when increasing the availability of fuel alternatives; and (c) the availability of non-wood forms of fuel should be increased in the targeted areas and steps be taken to ensure that fuel alternatives are priced within the local populations’ financial capabilities.

Strategy for Implementing Participation Plan

As previously mentioned, it is considered that the information dissemination component of the project and the Public Participation Plan is especially crucial to the overall success of the project. The populations living in the targeted areas are largely uninformed about forestry issues – to achieve participation on the part of the local populations this situation should be remedied. The SA found three important issues that should be addressed in the design of an effective information dissemination plan. First, foresters and forestry representatives or experts were the most desired and the most effective sources of information for the populations living in Racha, Svaneti and Lechkhumi. Second, television would not be an effective medium through which to reach the poorest of households. Third, certain segments of the populations in Racha, Svaneti and Lechkhumi were found to be more likely to report never receiving and forest-related information at all. These findings indicate that the following segments are currently being missed by the available information and should be targeted in future information dissemination efforts: women, villagers under the age of 20, villagers over the age of 50; the poorest of villagers; and villagers living in Ambrolauri and Lentekhi.

70 Women. Women tended to be more interested in the historical and traditional significance of their local nature and resources, but they were less interested in forestry issues in general. It is considered necessary to build women’s interest in forestry issues while informing them about sustainable forest practices. It is recommended that printed materials, such as brochures, calendars, posters, etc., be utilized to target women. These materials should be distributed or displayed in easily accessible locations that are frequented by women or families, such as market places, village centers, etc. Effective themes and topics would include:

 The local importance of native plants, especially edible plants such as herbs;

 Memories of community or family activities in the past’s more pristine forests; and

 The historical and/or religious significance of the region’s natural attributes.

Youth. Younger villagers (under the age of 20) expressed a pronounced interest in fuel alternatives to wood. This segment was also interested in economic and employment opportunities. It is recommended that electronic media sources (radio and television) be utilized in addition to other informative formats to reach young villagers. Effective themes and topics would include:

 Fuel alternatives to wood, including their promotion and description; and

 The commercial sector development components of the project, including how sustainable forest utilization can be profitable, why forest and resource protection efforts are integral factors in the development of a local tourism sector, etc.

The Elderly. Older villagers (age 50 and up) tended to express more interest in general forestry issues. It is recommended that foresters and forestry representatives or experts be established as a major source of information in the targeted areas to reach this segment of the public. In addition, radio and printed media such as newspapers would be effective in reaching portions of the older inhabitants. Effective themes would include:

 The significance of natural attributes, especially the traditional or historical importance of local nature or resources;

 The long-term benefits of preserving forests and forest resources; and

 The financial benefits of sustainable forest utilization to local economies, including how this project can strengthen local employment opportunities and the quality of municipal infrastructure and services.

71 The Poorest. The poorest of villagers were the least informed about forestry issues and the least willing to be involved forest management or protection. Because these villagers were the most likely to fell fuel wood, and to do so without licenses, their involvement is considered crucial. It is recommended that foresters, etc. be trained on disseminating information to villagers to reach the poorest of households.

Much of the Georgian population is in some regard linked to Georgian forests. Therefore, an educational and awareness campaign should target the general public as well as specific groups defined by geographical location, age and profession. The exigencies of these groups differ dramatically in some cases and these differences must be considered when developing messages and information to ensure that the idiosyncrasies of each group are considered. These target groups include the following: community leaders and local authorities, Eco-police, educators, forestry workers; the Georgian public; media representatives; owners and employees of businesses related to forests and their resources; populations living in forested areas; and youth.

To aid in the development of the participation plan, Annex 2 contains a list of specific information campaign tools suggested by participants in the focus groups and semi-structured interviews as well as members of the NGO community. Annex 3 contains a list of NGOs and their contact information

Recognize Regional Differences in Project Implementation

The findings of the SA indicate that there are significant differences among the populations of Tsageri, Ambrolauri, Lentekhi and Oni with respect to their social and economic conditions as well as their perspectives on forest resources and their management. GFDP managers, therefore, should take these differences into account during project implementation and phase in the recommendations. For example, initially, GFDP managers may first want to tackle those geographic areas that are most receptive to the recommendations and target an information/educational program to those which are less receptive. As lessons are learned from the initial phase, they could be applied to programs for those areas that were initially less receptive but which have become more knowledgeable due to the initial information campaigns.

Tsageri. Based on the findings of the SA, residents of Tsageri are most likely to use alternative fuels and to participate directly in forest management activities. The people of this region are the most alarmed about forestry degradation and are most likely to want alternative fuels. They also have the highest incomes generally so they can more easily afford to act on their desire to utilize alternative fuels more. Additionally, they are most likely to be against restrictions on wood cutting and are more likely to blame the government for forestry problems. Therefore, they would more likely respond to economic encouragement than regulatory punishment. Finally, the people of Tsageri are the most informed and, therefore, are more ready to adopt new programs than other regions. Tsageri is most ripe for a pilot project comprising the recommendations described throughout this section.

Ambrolauri presents a different set of conditions indicating that it would be most appropriate initially to introduce an information campaign. Once the campaign has become

72 effective and lessons have been learned from the experience in Tsageri, the GFDP managers may want to apply the same approach to Ambrolauri. Ambrolauri depends on wood cutting greatly but is also among the poorest regions and the least knowledgeable about forestry conditions and government policies and programs. Education about the worsening forestry conditions could help residents slow the deterioration of forests. The education also may mitigate the blame that many in this region place on government for this deterioration. In addition, much stronger enforcement of existing laws could improve the government’s credibility with the population. Because Ambrolauri is substantially poorer than Tsageri, the Government may need to subsidize the program much more than in Tsageri.

Conditions in Lentekhi are similar to those in Ambrolauri. The most significant difference between them is that in contrast to the people of Ambrolauri, people in Lentekhi do not place as much blame on the government for deteriorating forests. In addition, they trust television more and friends and family less. Consequently, GFDP managers may want to implement recommendations in Lentekhi similarly to those for Ambrolauri, but place less emphasize initial law enforcement and use television more in the initial stages of the information campaign.

The people of Oni can be expected to be the least receptive to the recommendations in this. First, its residents are less likely to feel that forestry degradation is a serious problem. Second, they are less likely to want to restrict forest use. Third, oak and beech trees already are restricted from cutting, and this covers a significant amount of forest areas in the region. Fourth, Oni residents are most dependent on fuel wood from the forests and thus would have the most to lose from additional restrictions. Finally, few currently blame government for forestry degradation, with about half the population feeling that weather conditions are responsible for any declines that may be occurring. Given all of these views and factors, Oni residents would be more likely than those of any other region to resist proactive government involvement to restrict forest use. The Government, the population, and forest resources may have the least to gain in Oni with the implementation of the SA’s recommendations. GFDP managers may want to study Oni further to tailor recommendations to fit Oni’s unique conditions while it implements an information campaign in that area.

CHAPTER 6: MONITORING AND EVALUATION

The Georgia Forests Development Project (GFDP) addresses a broad range of assets and issues – from energy and roads to integrated forest management to the complexities of poverty. The proposed program is expected to provide long-term, continuous and adaptable support for forestry resource management. Therefore, the results of initial phases of the program must be recorded, assessed, and used to develop additional solutions to forest management-related problems. Specific output and impact indicators of the project’s progress will be monitored and evaluated. The monitoring and evaluation program should address impacts on the population, forest management, and the condition of forest resources.

Population Activities

73  The number and location of people purchasing tickets to cut wood (specifying age and gender);

 The average and median expenditure and income per household, the average number of household members, and the average number of household workers actively looking for work but who are unemployed;

 The amount of revenue generated per forest district through the sale of wood-cutting tickets;

 The number of those who have regularly cut wood who turn to alternative fuels for heating and/or cooking;

 The proportion of those who have turned to alternative fuels who continue to cut wood, and the reasons why they continue to cut wood;

 The number of credit institutions and the number of people accessing loans from credit institutions; and

Public Participation and Awareness

 The number of educational workshops/seminars held in each forest district and the average number of people who attend (specifying attendees by age, gender and type of participant (citizen, NGO, commercial logger);

 The number of citizen, NGO and commercial representatives actively participating in government forest management bodies, committees and special panels;

 The level of awareness among the population of government forest management laws, regulations and activities (specifying results by age and gender);

Forest Management

 The amount of new timber growth and the amount of wood leaving specific areas;

 The type and number of violations of licensing restrictions, the number of repeat offenders, the average number of offenses for repeat offenders, and the average amount of fine or jail time per offense by category of offense;

 Type and number of instances of official corruption and the number of disciplinary actions taken per type of offense;

 The number of forestry districts with established norms for quantity of wood cut per license holder, and the average quantity of wood permitted to be cut per license holder;

 The number of forestry officials operating “in the field” per hectare of forest;

74  The average amount of budget devoted directly to forest management at local departments per hectare of forest managed;

 The average salary of forest management personnel by category of worker and the average number of days by which salary payments have been delayed;

 The number of NGO offices established in each forestry region and the average number of full-time and part-time workers staffing these offices;

 The number and locations of forest management clubs established per hectare and the number of active members of these clubs per hectare (specifying members by age and gender);

 The number of forestry officials who have satisfactorily completed training in natural resource management, general management and communications/public relations;

 The number of new businesses established and the number of those that functionally and directly contribute to improved forestry health.

75 ANNEX 1: LIST OF INTERVIEWS BY PROFESSION

Tbilisi

1. SAKTKEPROEKTI, State Company under the State Department of Forestry of Georgia, Head of Entrepreneur-Financial Department; 2. Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources Protection, Department of Biodiversity Protection, Head of Forest Protection Sub-Department; 3. Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources Protection, Department of Biodiversity Protection, Leading Specialist of Forest Protection Sub-Department; 4. State Forestry Department of Georgia, Forest Inspection, Head of Forest Inspection; 5. State Forestry Department of Georgia, Department of Forest Protection, Head of the Department; 6. State Forestry Department of Georgia, Department of Forest and Natural Resources Planning, Head of the Department; 7. State Company SAKTKEPROEKTI, Deputy Director; 8. State Company SAKTKEPROEKTI, Engineer; 9. State Forestry Department of Georgia, Department of Forest Rehabilitation, Head of Department; 10. Ministry of Food and Agriculture, Department of Environmental and Natural Resources Protection, Head of Department; 11. SAKTKEPROEKTI, Chief Specialist; 12. State Road Department, Department of Roads Exploitation, Head of the Department; 13. Ministry of Urbanization and Construction of Georgia, Department of Construction and Building Materials, Head of Department; 14. Research Institute of Plant Protection, Leading Specialist; 15. Tbilisi Dendrological Park, employee; 16. Ecological Police of Georgia, Department of Control and Analyses, Mr. Merab Imedashvili (position not stated); 17. Department of Hunting Reserves (position not stated); 18. CAUCASTRANSEXPEDITORI (position not stated);

76 19. Ecological Police of Georgia, Department of Illegal Wood Felling Prevention, Head of the Department; 20. Ministry of Interior Affairs, Department of Ecological Police, Sub-Department of Illegal Wood Felling Prevention, Head of Department; 21. Ministry of Interior Affairs, Department of Ecological Police, Sub-Department of Poaching and Illegal Hunting Prevention, Head of the Department; 22. Hunters’ Union of Georgia, Specialist of Sportive Hunting; 23. Art-Producing Plant, Carpentry Workshop, Director; 24. Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources Protection, Department of Biodiversity Protection, Forest Protection Sub-Department, employee; 25. Carpentry Workshop, carpenter; 26. Ministry of Internal Affairs, Department of Ecological Police, Sub-Department of Illegal Wood Felling Prevention, Head of Department; 27. Ministry of Environmental and Natural Resources Protection, Department of Biodiversity Protection, Conventional Service, employee; 28. Khudadov forest, forester; 29. Ecological Police of Georgia, Department of Illegal Wood Felling Prevention, Inspector.

Six interviews were carried out with representatives of NGOs in Tbilisi: Friends of the Earth, Green Movement of Georgia (two interviews), NACRES, Center for Conservation of Species (two interviews), World Wide Fund for Nature Program Office in Georgia (two interviews).

Racha

1. Oni Forestry, Chief Forester; 2. Forestry, Director; 3. School-Lyceum, Director; 4. Ecological Police, Senior Inspector; 5. Hunter Papuna Sirbiladze; 6. Land Management Department of Oni, Head; 7. Forestry, Workshop of Consumables, Head;

77 8. Auto-transport Company, Director; 9. Agricultural Construction and Development Project, Chief Manager; 10. Oni Forestry, Engineer; 11. Ambrolauri Forestry, Director; 12. Forestry, Chief Forester; 13. Hunter Merab Chitaladze; 14. Racha-Lechkhumi Kvemo Svaneti Ecological Police, Head; 15. JSC SHAKHTMSHEBI, Contractor; 16. Racha Regional Department of Environmental and Natural Resources Protection, Chief Specialist; 17. Sawing plant BERMUKHA, Executive; 18. Ambrolauri Hospital, Chief Physician; 19. Farmer Zaza Bochorishvili; 20. Racha Regional Department of Environmental and Natural Resources Protection, Head.

Svaneti

1. Lentekhi Court, Judge; 2. Bee-keeper Mirza Gazdeliani; 3. Lentekhi Local Administration, Deputy-Head; 4. Svaneti-Lechkhumi Regional Department of Environmental and Natural Resources Protection, Head; 5. Lentekhi Forestry, Director; 6. Ecological Police, Chief Inspector; 7. Hunter Zurab Chakseliani; 8. Hunter Gaga Khabuliani; 9. Kutaisi JSC IVERA's and Lentekhi Forestry's joint company LENTCHI, Director; 10. Lentekhi Forestry, Chief Forester; 11. SASASHI Ltd., Chairman; 12. Forester Avto Oniani; 13. Tsageri Local Administration, Deputy-Head;

78 14. Tsageri Local Government, Chairman; 15. Tsageri Forestry, Director; 16. Tsageri Department of Agriculture, Head; 17. Tsageri Forestry, forester Karlo Karseladze; 18. Forester Zhora Akhvlediani; 19. Hunter Gulliver Letodiani.

79 ANNEX 2: SUGGESTED PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ACTIVITIES

No. Sphere Objective Activity/ Target group Media/ Main Actors/ Product Setting Initiators 1 General Increasing Preparation of Pupils of Poster Designer/ Knowledge knowledge of poster “What the primary and Company main functions of forest does” secondary forests school 2 General Increasing Discussion of the Pupils of Classroo Teachers Knowledge knowledge of poster “What the primary and m main functions of forest does” secondary forests school 3 General Increase of Calendar General Calendar Designer/ Knowledge knowledge of public / Company forest products medical professionals 4 General Increase of Competition Children of Written Teachers, Ministry of knowledge general “What do you tertiary school test education, Ministry of knowledge know about the environment forests” 5 General Increase of Nature tours General public Villages Private business knowledge awareness, love of organized by low in forest nature budget family for area retreats in forest area farm houses 6 General Increase of Essay Contest: ‘My General public/ Journal Journalists knowledge awareness of personal youth and radio forest animals experience with animals” 7 General Increase of Regular TV General public TV TV production team, knowledge awareness and program on NGOs knowledge about ecology and ecology/ biodiversity biodiversity 8 General Increase of pride Photo competition General public Exhibitio Advertising agency, knowledge in forests “Our pride resides n Forestry department, in forest” NGOs, Media 9 General Increase of pride Drawing/painting Schoolchildren Exhibitio Forestry department, knowledge in forests competition “The of all ages n Ministry of ecology, Forest and Human Teachers, Media Beings” 10 General Increase of TV serial for Schoolchildren TV TV production team knowledge awareness and children depicting of all ages knowledge children’s adventures in environment 11 General Increase of Regular TV General public TV TV team knowledge awareness, program on program NGO monitoring of “Forest life” incl. Forest department forests sector news, Ministry of violation of laws, environment, Private illegal logging, business achievements in conservation, etc.

80 No. Sphere Objective Activity/ Target group Media/ Main Actors/ Product Setting Initiators 12 General Increase of TV broadcast General public TV TV production team, knowledge awareness, “Devoted to broadcast panel compiled of stimulation of nature” spots and forest professionals environment meetings with 5 and community protection persons in each leaders broadcast dealing with forestry issues 13 General Increase of Training course in Media Worksho University and knowledge knowledge of ecology representatives p research institute ecological issues staff / Foreign experts 14 General Increase of Training course in Teachers Worksho University and knowledge knowledge in nature p research institute staff/ nature preservation Foreign experts preservation 15 General Increase of Competition for Teachers of Competiti Teachers, knowledge knowledge of text-book on secondary on Ministry of education, natural resources natural resources school University, and their NGOs protection 16 General Public interaction Preparation of the Teachers/ Worksho Teachers knowledge with forests staff for summer youth p NGOs camps 17 General Increase of Creation and General public Radio Advertising company, knowledge awareness broadcasting of NGOs public awareness spots on forestry topics for radio 18 General Increase of Creation and General CD NGOs knowledge awareness and distribution of public / tourists Research institutes, knowledge about CD-ROM Advertising company Georgian forests “Forests of Georgia” 19 General Increase of Puzzle “Trees” Children of Puzzle Designer, Advertising knowledge knowledge about primary company Georgian forests schools 20 General Increase of Radio program General public Radio Radio production knowledge awareness “Sounds of team, NGOs Nature” presenting forestry issues and the aesthetic beauty of Georgian forests 21 General Increase of Preparation of Local Worksho NGOs, knowledge knowledge about families for population p Government officials, eco-tourism engaging in ecotourism professionals tourist activities 22 General Increase of Summer camp Children of Camp in Teachers, knowledge awareness of/ with focus on secondary and forest parents, and participation in survival skills and tertiary schools area NGOs regeneratio regeneration forest n regeneration 23 Hunting Increase of Creation of Hunting Brochure NGOs,

81 No. Sphere Objective Activity/ Target group Media/ Main Actors/ Product Setting Initiators knowledge about brochure households, Hunting enterprises hunting rules/ “Hunting rules” tourist houses (possibility of Regulations advertising to support publication costs) 24 Land use Increase of TV broadcasts on Inhabitants of TV TV production team knowledge about the experience of forested areas, consequences of different countries legislators, different form of concerning land general public land ownership use/ownership 25 Land use Increase of Radio discussion Inhabitants of Radio Radio journalists knowledge of with main forested areas, consequences of stakeholders legislators, different form of general public land ownership 26 Land use Increase of Survey Inhabitants of Survey Research team awareness about forest areas instrumen knowledge t/ concerning land Analysis use 27 Legislation Increase of Training course Eco-police Worksho Legislators, knowledge of on forest code p Government officials laws 28 Legislation Increase of Preparation of Local Brochure NGO, knowledge of brochure “Your authorities, Publishing House principal articles rights and community of Forest Code responsibilities” leaders, business 29 Legislation Increase of Discussion of Local Worksho NGO knowledge of brochure “Your authorities, p principal articles rights and community of Forest Code responsibilities” leaders, foresters, business 30 Manageme Education on Workshop Private Worksho Educators, nt management skills businesses p Business professionals 31 Manageme Increase of Two-day training Community Worksho NGOs, nt knowledge in course leaders, p Department of forestry sustainable forest forestry management employees 32 Preservatio Increase of Preparation of Schoolchildren Poster NGOs, n knowledge of poster “what you of all ages designer, preventive should and Advertising agency behaviors should not do in the forest” 33 Preservatio Increase of Discussion of Schoolchildren Classroo Teachers n knowledge of poster “what you of all ages m preventive can do and what behaviors you should not do in the forest” 34 Preservatio Increase of Preparation of the Children of Poster Advertising company n efficiency in poster “What to secondary and preservation do in case of fire” tertiary schools 35 Preservatio Increase of Discussion of the Children of Classroo Teacher

82 No. Sphere Objective Activity/ Target group Media/ Main Actors/ Product Setting Initiators n efficiency in poster “What to secondary and m prevention do in case of fire” tertiary schools 36 Preservatio Increase of On-site course on Population of Worksho Forest department n efficacy and prevention of fires forest areas ps employees prevention 37 Preservatio Increase of Preparation and Population of Calendar Advertising agency, n knowledge of distribution of forested areas Research institute behavior Forest Calendar 38 Preservatio Increase of Preparation of Local Poster/ Designer, Advertising n knowledge of tree poster or wall population Calendar company felling and related calendar with the engaged in tree issues drawings on tree felling felling technique 39 Preservatio Increase of On-site course Community Worksho Department of n knowledge of tree on tree felling leaders, local p Forestry felling population/ businesses engaged in tree felling 40 Preservatio Increase of Creation and General public TV TV production team, n awareness of broadcasting of Advertising company preservation TV clips on forest preservation 41 Regeneratio Reforestation Creation of Inhabitants of Forest Representatives of n Organization of forested areas, local forests, local Reforestation adults and authorities, schoolchildren community leaders, teachers

83 ANNEX 3: FOREST RELATED NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS

No Name Address Contact person Source 1 Agrobiodiversity Protection Tbilisi. Delisi III, nakveti 16 Taiul Berishvili 3 Society “Dika” Tel: 328321 Levan Popiashvili Fax: 536484 [email protected] 2 Association “Guriis Mtebi” Ozurgeti. Tengiz Beriashvili 2 3, Chavchavadze str. 3 Association “Mteni” Tbilisi. Vaza-Pshavela kv.V, Ana Mdinaradze 4 korp.IV.Ap.12 Tel:327446 4 Association“Sulieri Chokhatauri. Ketevan Kukulava 2 Agordzineba” 44, Dumbadze str. Tel:8-219 2445 5 Association “Tontio- Gori. 26, Gorijvari str. Alexander Tsertsvadze 2 Sustainable Environment and Tel:8-270 21382 Tourism 8-270 25377 6 Association “Tsisperi Mtebi” Signagi. George Cherkezishvili 2 Bejanishvili str. University building Tel: 8-255 31685 In Tbilisi 964112 9 Biological Farming Tbilisi, Nana Nemsadze 1,3 Association ELKANA Delisi III, Nakveti 16 Tel:536487/86/85 Fax:536484 [email protected] 10 CUNA Georgica- Georgian Tbilisi. 3, Dzmebi Kakabadze Udo Hirsh 1,3 Society of Culture and Nature str. Natela Gvenetadze protection Tel/Fax:932555 [email protected] 11 ECO 21 Bagdadi. Zoia Maglakelidze 2 4, Vaza-Pshavela Tel: 8-234 2687 12 Ecocenter for Environmental Tbilisi. Tsotne Mirtskulava 3 Protection from Floods and 60,Chavchavadze ave. 2fl.room Pridon Shatberashvili Flashfloods 28 13 Ecological Biomonitoring Tbilisi, Maka Chichua, Manana 1,3 Association EBA 60,Agmashenebeli ave. 2fl. Zhuruli Room 28 Tel/Fax:959602 14 Ecological Center Tbilisi. Gia Kadzhaia 3 2, University str. Tel: 303201 15 Ecological Law Club Tbilisi. Paliko Abaiadze 1,3 22, Leselidze Str. Koba Kajrishvili Tel: 932348 986039 [email protected] 16 Environmental Information Tbilisi. Keti Grigolia 1,3 and Sustainable Development 57a, Saburtalo str. Pavle Tsagareishvili Center RIO Tel: 394342;

84 No Name Address Contact person Source Fax: 943670 [email protected] 17 Foundation “Sitstsotskhle” Telavi. Simon Okhanashvili 2 16, Kostava str. Tel: 8-250 31818 8-227036703 18 Foundation for Energo Tbilisi, Parliament building, Vakhtang Zakrua 1,2 Efficiency Room 407. Tel/Fax:987797 19 Gaia Tbilisi. 180, D.Agmashenebeli Zaal Kikvadze 1 ave. Tamar Meipariani Tel: 337672 20 Garemo Khashuri. Aleksi Gogishvili 3 9, D.Agmashenebeli str. Tel: 8-268 23431 8-268 21790 21 Georgian Association of Girl Tbilisi Nana Bilashvili 4 Scouts “Dia” Tel:299179 Fax:253222 [email protected] 22 Georgian Center for the Tbilisi. Alexander Gavashelishvili 3 Conservation of the Wildlife 4/2 Ambrolauri str. Tel: 373894 [email protected] 23 Georgian Ecological Tbilisi Nika Oniani Foundation 2, University str Zurab Kereselidze 24 Georgian Nature and Tbilisi. Bidzina Tavadze 3 Historical Valuables Defend 9, Mindeli str Association Tel:410916;303170 25 Georgian Society for the Tbilisi. Mzia Lolishvili 1,3 Protection of Animals 35, Sakanela str. Levan Butkhuzi “Lomisa” Tel: 330113 Fax:987797 26 Georgian Young Naturalist Tbilisi. George Japashvili 3 Association 31, Chavchavadze Ave. Tel:293854;707003 [email protected] 27 Green Cross Akhaltsikhe, Ramaz Korshia 1,2 15 Antimoz Iverieli str. Tel: 8- 265 2 12 19 28 Green Earth Foundation Tbilisi. Nugzar Meladze 3 4/3 Mazniashvili Str. Dodo Kereselidze Tel: 951616 Fax:958420 [email protected] 29 Green Wave Tbilisi Maka Jakhua 1 45,Vaza-Pshavela, XVII floor. Tel:997169 [email protected] 30 Greens Movement of Georgia Tbilisi, Nana Nemsadze 1,3 182, Agmashenebeli ave. Rusiko Simonidze Tel:952033; 354751 Fax: 351674 [email protected] 31 Historical-Ecological Zugdidi. Luisa Tsimintia 3 Association “Mapalu” 50, Agmashenebeli ave. Gia Khasia

85 No Name Address Contact person Source Tel: 8-215 25010 32 Horizonti Tbilisi, Nino Saakashvili 1,2 33,Gogebashvili str. Tel/Fax:292955; 987504 [email protected] 33 Human and Biosphere Zugdidi. Gia Agumava 3 1,Tsotne Dadiani str. Tel: 8-215 25010 8-215 22234 [email protected] 34 Human Environment Tbilisi. 75, Chsvchavadze Ave. Gia Giorgadze 3 Development Foundation Tel: 359863 “GORA” 35 Information association “Asa” Kutaisi. Zurab Kenchoshvili 2 71,Tsereteli str. Lia Shengelia Tel:8-231 71189 8-231 40675 36 International Center for Tbilisi. George Tarkhan-Mouravi 4 Geopolitical and Regional 47, Paliashvili str. Studies Tel:221655 Fax:984034 37 International Foundation for Tbilisi. Nana the development of D.Abashidze 3 Sumbadze personality Tel/Fax:957392 [email protected] 38 International Society Tbilisi. Avtandil Tolomashvili 3 “Ecology” 75,Kostava str. Tel:366331 390422 39 Irao Tbilisi. George Shalibashv ii 4 5, Marjanishvili str. Tel:969155 40 Journalists for harmonization Tbilisi Tamara Rukhadze 1 on earth 939278 41 Jvari Dzvari. Londa khasia 1,3 3, Rustaveli str. 3fl. Tel: 31136 42 “Mesame Planeta” Kharagauli George 2 6, Solomon Mephe str. Komakhidze Tel: 8-234 21509 8-234 21527 43 NACRES Tbilisi. Jason Badridze 1,3 8, Mskheta str. entr.V Levan Butkhuzi Tel/Fax: 222793 [email protected] 44 Nature Supporters Society Kutaisi David Kupreishvili 1,3 “Kolkhety” 11, Tsminda Nino str. Tel: 8-231 55279 45 Oazisi Abastumani, Observatory Amiran Kimeridze 2 Tel:8-265 21757 46 Orchids Tbilisi. Maia Akhalkatsi 3 Nutsubidze plateau 3-3-2-3. Marina Mosulishvili Tel: 323429; 231146 Fax: 001153

86 No Name Address Contact person Source [email protected] 47 Plant Protection Foundation Tbilisi. Cisia Chkhubianishvili 3 “Tsiskari” 6, Phanaskerteli Str. Ap.140 Tel: 389803 [email protected] 48 Society “Aragveli” Tbilisi. Otar Dudauri 3 1,Aleksidze str. build.9 Tel: 940234 997746 [email protected] 49 Society of Friends of Nature Bakuriani. Dato Kikodze 3 “Tskhratskaro” Secondary school building. Nukri Sikharulidze Tel:988275 997746 [email protected] 50 “Spectri” Kutaisi. Merab Iremadze 2 98,Akhalgazrdobis ave. Ketevan Tskhakaia Tel:8-231 42811 8-231 99532 51 Sustainable Tourism Center Tbilisi. Vano Vashakmadze 1,3 14, Griboedov str. Tel:996304:252577 Fax:226030 [email protected] 52 Tbilisi Environment and Tbilisi. George Putkaridze 3 Nature Protection Union 16, Vaza-Pshavela Ave. “Green Cover” Tel:373974 Fax:373993 53 UNEP/GRID Tbilisi. Zurab Chincharadze 1,3 1, M.Aleksidze str. 6fl. Room 603 Tel:335514; Fax: 942808 [email protected]

54 World Wide Fund for Nature- Tbilisi. George Sanadiradze 1,3 Georgia 11, M.Aleksidze str. Nugzar Zazanashvili Tel:330154/55 Fax:330190 [email protected]

Source: 1 - List of Ministry of Environment and natural Resources protection 2 – Catalogue of regional NGOs of Georgia. “Horizonti” publication. March 1999 3 – Georgian NGOs directory. ITIC publication. November 1999 4 – Other

87 ANNEX 4: MAP OF GEORGIA AND SURVEY AREA

88 ANNEX 5: STATISTICAL DATA FIGURES