DOCSLIB.ORG

The World Bank Qualitative Survey on Disability and Living Standards in Georgia

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The World Bank Qualitative Survey on Disability and Living Standards in Georgia The World Bank Qualitative Survey on Disability and Living Standards in Georgia Report 2007 The World Bank Qualitative Survey on Disability and Living Standards in Georgia Report 2007 © PA Knowledge Limited 2006 PA Consulting Group 4601 N. Fairfax Drive Prepared by: PA Consulting Suite 600 Arlington, VA 22203 Tel: +1-571-227-9000 Prepared for: Fax: +1-571-227-9001 www.paconsulting.com Final Draft Analysis Report 4/26/07 Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) Institute for Policy Studies 10, Chavchavadze av. VI ent. Tbilisi, Georgia World Bank Tel/Fax:899532-220060 Disability and www.ips.ge Development Team Final Draft Analysis Report 4/26/07 Disclaimer This paper has not undergone the review accorded to official World Bank publications. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank and its affiliated organizations, or those of the Executive Directors of The World Bank or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. i Final Draft Analysis Report 4/26/07 … Foreward Report has been prepared by PA_Consulting and The Institute for Policy Studies (IPS). The analysis was done by Tatyana Yamova and Nana Sumbadze, field work was carried out by Nana Sumbadze, Giorgi Cheishvili, Tamar Makharadze, Ekaterine Pirtskalava and Tiko Nozadze. The meetings were organized and working group was consulted by Manon Khachidze. Report reflects the situation with disability in Georgia as for September, 2006. Since then a number of important changes has occurred, The procedure of acquiring disability status has been changed-According to the order 63/n (27.02.2007) of ministry of Labor, Health and Social Protection instead of abolished medico-social bureaus status is granted by medical facility of general or specialized character, the list of nozologies entitled for getting inability status has been shortened; According to the Government Resolution of January, 4 2007 subsidizes to persons, and among them also to those with disabilities, who had benefits on communal payments increased; According to Georgian Law on Social Assistance (4289-RS, 29.12.2006) reintegration subsidies are provided to those biological families, who decide to take back the disabled child from specialized institution. According to the same law the care is compensated to the families who take back an adult disabled person; Disabled person can be provided by in-kind subsidy; The order of the Minister of Labor, Health and Social Protection has been prepared on forming at the Ministry of Coordination Committee on Disability Issues. 10 representatives of NGOs will sit in the committee. Working group would like to express its deep gratitude to all the participants of the study for sincerity and cooperation. Participation in discussion required serious effort for many. The names of all the respondents and focus group participants except representatives of official structures and experts are changed. Report reflects the attitudes, perceptions, thoughts and hopes of persons with disability, their caregivers and other key stakeholders. We hope that it will have an impact on the formulation of disability policy and will contribute to the integration of disabled and improvement of the quality of their lives. ii Final Draft Analysis Report 4/26/07 List of Abbreviations… List of Abbreviations GEL Georgian Lari ICF International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health NGO Non-Government Organization MoES Ministry of Education and Science MoHLSP Ministry of Health, Labor and Social Protection SU Soviet Union SUSIFIG State United Social Insurance Fund of Georgia US United States of America USAID United States Agency for International Development WHO World Health Organization iii Final Draft Analysis Report 4/26/07 TABLE OF CONTENTS… TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ..........................................................................................................1-1 1.1 Brief Overview of Disability Statistics in Georgia.................................................1-1 1.2 Research Methodology...........................................................................................1-3 2. RESEARCH FINDINGS................................................................................................2-1 2.1 Key stakeholders ....................................................................................................2-1 2.1.1 Disabled Persons...............................................................................................2-1 2.1.2 Caretakers .........................................................................................................2-1 2.1.3 Organizations of Disabled People and Care Providers.......................................2-2 2.1.4 Government Entities...........................................................................................2-4 2.1.5 Educational and Health Care Facilities...............................................................2-5 2.1.6 Service Providers...............................................................................................2-5 2.1.7 Donors ...............................................................................................................2-6 2.1.8 Church ...............................................................................................................2-7 2.2 State Policy and Social Assistance .......................................................................2-7 2.2.1 Overview of the Georgian Legislation on Disability.............................................2-7 2.2.2 Social Assistance.............................................................................................2-10 2.3 Health care.............................................................................................................2-11 2.3.1 State Healthcare Coverage ..............................................................................2-11 2.3.2 Institutions and Services for Disabled People...................................................2-11 2.4 Education...............................................................................................................2-13 2.4.1 Primary Education............................................................................................2-13 a. Regular Schools ..................................................................................................2-14 b. Home schooling...................................................................................................2-14 c. schools with inclusive education component........................................................2-14 d. Boarding Schools.................................................................................................2-15 e. Day Centers.........................................................................................................2-15 2.4.2 Vocational and High Education ........................................................................2-16 2.4.3 Main Barriers to Attending Educational Facilities..............................................2-16 2.5 Employment...........................................................................................................2-17 2.5.1 Employment Opportunities ...............................................................................2-17 2.5.2 Importance of Employment for Disabled Persons.............................................2-17 2.5.3 Georgian NGOs Providing Employment Opportunities .....................................2-19 2.6 Recreation and Leisure.........................................................................................2-19 2.7 Integration Factors................................................................................................2-20 2.7.1 Severity, Type and Onset of Disability..............................................................2-20 2.7.2 Attitude of Society ............................................................................................2-20 2.7.3 Attitude of Parents/Caretakers .........................................................................2-21 2.7.4 Mobility and Architectural Barriers....................................................................2-21 iv Final Draft Analysis Report 4/26/07 TABLE OF CONTENTS… 2.7.5 Access to Information, Communication and Social Network.............................2-21 2.7.6 Economic Condition of the Household and Place of Residence .......................2-22 2.7.7 Personality of Disabled People and Skills for Independent Living.....................2-22 2.7.8 Religious Faith .................................................................................................2-23 3. CONCLUSIONS ...........................................................................................................3-1 3.1 Main Barriers Faced by Disabled People in Georgia ............................................3-1 3.1.1 Unclear and Inconsistent State Policy towards Disability....................................3-1 3.1.2 Isolation, Lack of Representation and Participation in Country’s life...................3-1 3.1.3 Society’s Attitude
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Linguistics Verbal Temporal Categories in Georgian Sign Language (GESL) Tamar Makharoblidze Ilia State University. Tbilisi, Ge
    Linguistics Verbal Temporal Categories in Georgian Sign Language (GESL) Tamar Makharoblidze Ilia State University. Tbilisi, Georgia Presented by Academy Member Thomas Gamkrelidze Abstract GESL verbal morphology has its temporal system. Sign languages (SL) reveal their specific attitude toward spatial and temporal entities. The most shared temporal line in SL is as follows: -- distant past --/-- recent past ---/-- present /body--/-- near future --/-- distant future - The body is present, the future is ahead and back is past. Near close is the near future, close to the back is close past, and far away forward is a distant future and far away back is a distant past. Such an approach is shared by almost all SL with a very few exception. Obviously, the GESL has its temporal vocabulary as well. Time-related words often indicate circularity and cycling. Crucially, GESL also has the morphological verbal markers of tense (future and past), aspect and durative. The presented paper reveals these verbal temporal markers. Keywords: Tense aspect, sign languages, GESL (Georgian Sign Language) The Georgian sign language (GESL) is a native language for Deaf and Hard of Hearing people (DHH) of Georgia. These people are the linguistic minority of the country, and their number is about 2500. Crucially, in spite of a significant influence of the Russian Sign Language, GESL has its individual grammar system. The presented paper is one of the first investigations on the verbal temporal categories in this language. Usually sign languages (SL) demonstrate specific temporal systems with considerable variations. In SL linguistic information is encoded by non-verbal means. Thus, body position, mimic and manual signs display the linguistic content for any grammar category.
    [Show full text]
  • 201569Pub.Pdf
    PDF hosted at the Radboud Repository of the Radboud University Nijmegen The following full text is a publisher's version. For additional information about this publication click this link. http://hdl.handle.net/2066/201569 Please be advised that this information was generated on 2021-09-25 and may be subject to change. a journal of Börstell, Carl. 2019. Differential object marking in sign general linguistics Glossa languages. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 4(1): 3. 1–18, DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.780 SQUIB Differential object marking in sign languages Carl Börstell Radboud University, Erasmusplein 1, 6525 HT Nijmegen, NL [email protected] Sign languages are sometimes claimed to lack argument marking, yet they exhibit many devices to track and disambiguate referents. In this paper, I will argue that there are devices found across sign languages that demonstrate how object marking is a prevalent property and that these devices show clear parallels to differential object marking (DOM) as described for spoken languages. This includes animacy/prominence effects on word order and verbal modification, as well as dedicated object markers used exclusively with [+human] objects. Thus, I propose that DOM phenomena need to be taken into account in any future research on sign language structure, but also that sign languages should be accounted for in typological work on DOM. Keywords: Differential object marking; sign language; typology; animacy; prominence 1 Introduction Differential object marking (DOM) has been a well-known linguistic phenomenon for decades (Bossong 1985). DOM concerns object marking that is only present when the object has some specific properties – that is, not all objects are marked in the same way.
    [Show full text]
  • Efc Members Share Good Practice on Organising Accessible Events
    how do they do it? efc members share good practice on organising accessible events disability accessibility events EFC DISABILITY THEMATIC NETWORK how do they do it? efc members share good practice on organising accessible events annex to the zero project conference accessibility guidelines disability accessibility events EFC DISABILITY THEMATIC NETWORK Contents Foreword by Michael Fembek, Chair of the EFC Disability Thematic Network; and Director of the Zero Project, ESSL Foundation 2 Introduction — Why accessibility matters to EFC members 4 Organising accessible events — Good practice examples by EFC members 6 Organising accessible conferences in developing countries — We can do better Europe Foundation 7 Inclusive exhibitions — Art experiences for all Fondazione Banca del Monte di Lucca 8 New forms of accessible communications Fundación ONCE 9 Organising accessible events Genio 10 Developing an online community and meeting space Karuna Foundation Nepal 12 Online conferences for all Light for the World 13 Setting standards in event accessibility Sabancı Foundation 14 Creating arts and culture spaces — Barrier-free Stiftung Drachensee 16 Checklist for your accessible event 17 Key recommendations 19 About the Disability Thematic Network and the EFC 20 Contributors 21 1 EFC MEMBERS SHARE GOOD PRACTICE ON ORGANISING ACCESSIBLE EVENTS FOREWORD By Michael Fembek, Chair of the EFC Disability Thematic Network; and Director of the Zero Project, ESSL Foundation The Essl Foundation has organised the Zero Project Conferences annually now for eight
    [Show full text]
  • World Bank Document
    Document of The World Bank FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Public Disclosure Authorized Report No: 66462-GE PROJECT APPRAISAL DOCUMENT ON A PROPOSED CREDIT IN THE AMOUNT OF SDR 25.8 MILLION Public Disclosure Authorized (US$40.00 MILLION EQUIVALENT) AND A PROPOSED LOAN IN THE AMOUNT OF US$30 MILLION TO GEORGIA Public Disclosure Authorized FOR THE SECOND SECONDARY AND LOCAL ROADS PROJECT (SLRP-II) FEBRUARY 21, 2012 Sustainable Development Department South Caucasus Country Unit Europe and Central Asia Region Public Disclosure Authorized This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization. CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS (Exchange Rate Effective January 1, 2012) Currency Unit = Georgian Lari (GEL) GEL 1.66 = US$ 1.00 US$1.551 = SDR 1.00 FISCAL YEAR January 1 – December 31 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS AADT Average Annual Daily Traffic MCC Millennium Challenge Corporation ADB Asian Development Bank MENR Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources CPS Country Partnership Strategy MESD Ministry of Economy and Sustainable Development EA Environmental Assessment MRDI Ministry of Regional Development and Infrastructure EIB European Investment Bank NBG National Bank of Georgia EIRR Economic Internal Rate of Return NCB National Competitive Bidding EMP Environmental Management Plan NPV Net Present Value ESMF Environmental and Social Management Framework ORAF Operational Risk Assessment Framework FA Financing Agreement PAD
    [Show full text]
  • Urban Development in Georgia
    Key facts and figures relating to housing and urban development in Georgia Nino Gventsadze Head of spatial planning department Ministry of regional development and infrastructure of Georgia Housing in Georgia Current conditions Housing in Georgia is characterized with long and deep systematic crisis which are caused by the following reasons: non- existent policy, non-sufficient legislative base and non-adequate institutional set-up. Georgian government still doesn’t have a well-defined, clear policy in the field of Housing, also not a single office directly governs and works on Housing issues neither on legislation or enforcement level. Estimated future plan in Housing • To define short, medium and long term priorities Short term priority – should focus on how to fix homelessness, clearly define the terminology, exact identification of beneficiary groups and setting criteria for people who will receive the support, launching an institution, drafting legislation etc. Medium and long term - should focus on large number of people who will be able to afford the Housing (affordable Housing), provide an adequate Housing, improve policy making in regard of construction and urban development, solving demographic issues in the country etc. Improvements In 2018, Government of Georgia has taken a duty in implementing a “Housing policy documentation and strategic plan”, for that reason in 2019, April a special committee was established who will define a strategic plan. So far consultations are taking place. It is planned to make an amendments in legislation (In Georgian legislation there is the only law, which is dedicated to housing and needs a great deal of revise and improvement) The Ministry of Internally Displaced Persons from the Occupied Territories and Refugees of Georgia has realized several projects: • Ministry purchased 300 accommodations from the Chinese company “Hualing” • Throughout the country, ministry purchased several accommodations from developers, reconstructed, built new constructions etc.
    [Show full text]
  • Comrie, Bernard – Ehrengast Panel 39: Panel on Caucasian Languages and Cultures
    Comrie, Bernard – Ehrengast Panel 39: Panel on Caucasian languages and cultures Sprachökologie im Nordostkaukasus mit besonderer Berücksichtigung des Tsesischen Der Kaukasus galt bei den alten arabischen Geografen zu Recht als Berg der Sprachen. In diesem Grenzgebiet zwischen Europa und Asien wohnen mehr als 50 ethnolinguistische Gruppen. Einige Sprachen gehören zu Sprachfamilien, die ihre Hauptverbreitung außerhalb des Kaukasus haben (Indogermanisch, z.B. Armenisch und Ossetisch, Turksprachen, z.B. Aserbaidschanisch, Kumykisch und Karatschai-Balkarisch), aber es bleiben immerhin drei autochthone Sprachfamilien, die auf den Kaukasus beschränkt sind: Kartwelisch (z.B. Georgisch), Westkaukasisch (z.B. Kabardinisch, Abchasisch) und Nachisch-Dagestanisch (Ostkaukasisch), der Kern dieses Berichts. Größere Sprecherzahlen sind die Ausnahme: Nur wenige Sprachen habe mehr als eine Million Sprecher (Aserbaidschanisch, Georgisch, Armenisch, Tschetschenisch), die anderen reichen von den Hundertausenden bis in die Hunderte (z.B. Hinuchisch mit 600 Sprechern). Diese Situation unterscheidet sich erheblich von den Nachbargebieten Europa und dem Nahen Osten, wo sich größere Sprachgemeinschaften zumindest seit Einführung des Ackerbaus gebildet haben (s. weiter Comrie 2008). Woher kommt diese Sprachenvielfalt, besonders wo sie ihren Höhepunkt im Nordostkaukasus (Tschetschenien, Inguschetien und Dagestan in der Russischen Föderation samt angrenzender Teile von Georgien und Aserbaidschan) und vor allem im westlichen Dagestan (andische und tsesische Sprachen innerhalb der nachisch- dagestanischen Familie) findet? Erstens könnte man meinen, dass dies den natürlichen Stand der Dinge vor der Bildung größerer politischer Einheiten in den letzten Jahrtausenden darstellt. Der Kaukasus würde jedoch immer im starken Kontrast zu den Nachbargebieten stehen, obwohl die Einführung des Ackerbaus ziemlich früh stattgefunden hat. Es handelt sich nicht um einen späten Rest von Jägern und Sammlern.
    [Show full text]
  • Review of Fisheries and Aquaculture Development Potentials in Georgia
    FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Circular No. 1055/1 REU/C1055/1(En) ISSN 2070-6065 REVIEW OF FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE DEVELOPMENT POTENTIALS IN GEORGIA Copies of FAO publications can be requested from: Sales and Marketing Group Office of Knowledge Exchange, Research and Extension Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations E-mail: [email protected] Fax: +39 06 57053360 Web site: www.fao.org/icatalog/inter-e.htm FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Circular No. 1055/1 REU/C1055/1 (En) REVIEW OF FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE DEVELOPMENT POTENTIALS IN GEORGIA by Marina Khavtasi † Senior Specialist Department of Integrated Environmental Management and Biodiversity Ministry of the Environment Protection and Natural Resources Tbilisi, Georgia Marina Makarova Head of Division Water Resources Protection Ministry of the Environment Protection and Natural Resources Tbilisi, Georgia Irina Lomashvili Senior Specialist Department of Integrated Environmental Management and Biodiversity Ministry of the Environment Protection and Natural Resources Tbilisi, Georgia Archil Phartsvania National Consultant Thomas Moth-Poulsen Fishery Officer FAO Regional Office for Europe and Central Asia Budapest, Hungary András Woynarovich FAO Consultant FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS Rome, 2010 The designations employed and the presentation of material in this information product do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) concerning the legal or development status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The mention of specific companies or products of manufacturers, whether or not these have been patented, does not imply that these have been endorsed or recommended by FAO in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned.
    [Show full text]
  • MUNICIPAL WATER and WASTEWATER SECTOR in GEORGIA Status Report
    MUNICIPAL WATER AND WASTEWATER SECTOR IN GEORGIA Status Report By David Melua 2015 Municipal Water and Wastewater Sector in Georgia, status Report Table of Content Current situation page 3 Institutional Setting page 6 Legal framework page 16 Key findings and conclusions page 21 Abbreviations GWP – Georgian Water and Power GEL – Georgian Lari GUWSC – Georgian United Water Supply Company USAID – US agency for international Development EIB – European Investment Bank ADB – Asian Development Bank A.R. - Autonomous Republic KfW - Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau MDF – Municipal Development Fund WED – Water Framework Directive AA – association Agreement 2 Municipal Water and Wastewater Sector in Georgia, status Report 1. Current Situation About 95% of the urban and 35% of the rural population is supplied by centralised water service. This indicates high network coverage by international standards. The actual performance of this system is a problem, however. Poor quality of the distribution network results in a water loss rate of 10-51%, and 40% water loss in Tbilisi. All urban households suffer interrupted supply, receiving water much less than 24 hours a day, in some cities as little as 8-10 hours a day. In rural areas the supply system often does not function at all. This affects mainly people living on higher floors of buildings, because of low pressure in the sys- tem. The major reason for that is the shortage of electricity supply due to a lack of payment and also physical shortages. The majority of the connected urban households can have potentially good water quality, as the main source is groundwater. Groundwater sources provide about 90% of the water supply apart from Tbilisi.
    [Show full text]
  • Realizing the Urban Potential in Georgia: National Urban Assessment
    REALIZING THE URBAN POTENTIAL IN GEORGIA National Urban Assessment ASIAN DEVELOPMENT BANK REALIZING THE URBAN POTENTIAL IN GEORGIA NATIONAL URBAN ASSESSMENT ASIAN DEVELOPMENT BANK Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 IGO license (CC BY 3.0 IGO) © 2016 Asian Development Bank 6 ADB Avenue, Mandaluyong City, 1550 Metro Manila, Philippines Tel +63 2 632 4444; Fax +63 2 636 2444 www.adb.org Some rights reserved. Published in 2016. Printed in the Philippines. ISBN 978-92-9257-352-2 (Print), 978-92-9257-353-9 (e-ISBN) Publication Stock No. RPT168254 Cataloging-In-Publication Data Asian Development Bank. Realizing the urban potential in Georgia—National urban assessment. Mandaluyong City, Philippines: Asian Development Bank, 2016. 1. Urban development.2. Georgia.3. National urban assessment, strategy, and road maps. I. Asian Development Bank. The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Asian Development Bank (ADB) or its Board of Governors or the governments they represent. ADB does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this publication and accepts no responsibility for any consequence of their use. This publication was finalized in November 2015 and statistical data used was from the National Statistics Office of Georgia as available at the time on http://www.geostat.ge The mention of specific companies or products of manufacturers does not imply that they are endorsed or recommended by ADB in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. By making any designation of or reference to a particular territory or geographic area, or by using the term “country” in this document, ADB does not intend to make any judgments as to the legal or other status of any territory or area.
    [Show full text]
  • LEPL Tbilisi State Medical University First University Clinic Tbilisi Gudamakari St
    LEPL Tbilisi State Medical University First University Clinic Tbilisi Gudamakari st. N4 Aversi Clinic Ltd Tbilisi Vazha-Pshavela Ave. N27 b Neolab Ltd Tbilisi Tashkent st. N47 New Hospitals Ltd Tbilisi Krtsanisi st. N12 Medical Center "Cito" Tbilisi Paliashvili st. N40 Molecular Diagnostics Centre Tbilisi Lubliana st. N11 A Megalab Tbilisi Kavtaradze st. N23 Infections Diseases, Aids And Clinical Immunology Research Center Tbilisi Al. Kazbegi st. N16 Med Diagnostics Tbilisi A. Beliashvili N78 National Tuberculosis Center Tbilisi Adjara st. N8, 0101 State Laboratory of Agriculture, Tbilisi Zonal Diagnostic Laboratory (ZDL) Tbilisi V. Godziashvili st. N49 Medical World Diagnostics Ltd Tbilisi Lubliana st. N33 "National Genetics Laboratory" GN-Invest Ltd. Tbilisi David Agmashenebeli Ave. N240 Medi Prime Tbilisi Gabriel Salosi st. N9b5 PCR Diagnostic and Research Laboratory - Prime Lab Tbilisi Bokhua st. N11 Genomics Tbilisi Sulkhan Tsintsadze st. N23 Bacteriophage Analytical Diagnostic Center- Diagnose -90 Tbilisi L. Gotua st. N3 Ultramed Tbilisi Ureki st. N15 Medison Holding Tbilisi Gobronidze st. N27 Medison Holding Tbilisi Vazha-Pshavela Ave. 83/11 Medison Holding Tbilisi Kaloubani st. N12 Evex Clinics - Mtatsminda Polyclinic Tbilisi Vekua st. N3 Ltd. "Medcapital" - 1 Tbilisi D. Gamrekeli st. N19 Ltd. MedCapital - 2 Tbilisi Moscow Ave. 4th sq. 3rd quarter Ltd. "Medcapital" - 3 Tbilisi I. Vekua st. N18 "Tbilisi Adult Polyclinic N19" Ltd Tbilisi Moscow Ave. N23 JSC Evex Clinics - Didube Polyclinic Tbilisi Akaki Tsereteli Ave. N123 JSC Evex Clinics - Varketili Polyclinic Tbilisi Javakheti st. N30 JSC Evex Clinics - Isani Polyclinic Tbilisi Ketvan Tsamebuli Ave. N69 JSC Evex Clinics - Saburtalo Polyclinic Tbilisi Vazha-Pshvela Ave. N40 Tbilisi Sea Hospital Tbilisi Varketili-3 IV m / r, plot 14/430 "St.
    [Show full text]
  • Georgia: Urban Services Improvement Investment Program — Tranche 3
    ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT Semestral Report July 2018 Georgia: Urban Services Improvement Investment Program — Tranche 3 Prepared by “United Water Supply Company of Georgia”, LLC Tbilisi, Georgia for the Ministry of Regional Development and Infrastructure of Georgia and the Asian Development Bank This environmental monitoring report is a document of the borrower. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent those of ADB’s Board of Directors, management, or staff, and may be preliminary in nature. In preparing any country program or strategy, financing any project, or by making any designation of or reference to a particular territory or geographic area in this document, the Asian Development Bank does not intend to make any judgments as to the legal or other status of any territory or area. This environmental monitoring report is a document of the borrower. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent those of ADB’s Board of Directors, management, or staff, and may be preliminary in nature. In preparing any country program or strategy, financing any project, or by making any designation of or reference to a particular territory or geographic area in this document, the Asian Development Bank does not intend to make any judgments as to the legal or other status of any territory or area. 3 ABBREVIATIONS ADB Asian Development Bank DC Design Consultant DEPRP Department of Environmental protection, Resettlement and Construction Permit DIPDR Department of International Procurement and Donors Relations EA Executing Agency
    [Show full text]
  • Residential Market in Georgia 2017
    Residential Market in Georgia PREPARED FOR: 2017 CONTENT Executive Summary 3 Country Profile 4 Business Environment 5 Economic Outlook 6 Residential Market Fundamentals 8 Tbilisi Residential Market Overview 9 Batumi Residential Market Overview 23 Kutaisi Residential Market Overview 30 Conclusions and Outlook 35 Appendix 1 - Real Estate Registration and Construction Permit 36 Appendix 2 - Primary Information Sources, Data Used for the Study, Definitions and Assumptions 39 Disclaimer 41 Colliers Georgia at a Glance 42 Colliers Global Stats at a Glance 43 ALLIANCE HIGHLINE 2 Colliers International Georgia EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In 2017, 235 residential projects were completed in Tbilisi and Batumi. Tbilisi, the largest contributor of residential supply in Georgia, completed about 200 development projects in 2017, comprising 11,160 residential flats in total. In the last decades, this is a record number of completions occurred on the residential market. Completing 35 residential projects, Batumi was the second largest contributor of large-scale developments in Georgia. Currently, developers are working on additional 600 residential projects in total. It should be noted that about 45% of Tbilisi’s residential construction work is being done by small-sized developers, while in Batumi large developers are doing the majority of work (64%). Transactions reached their highest point since 2012. In 2017, the number of residential transactions rose dramatically to a record 28,000 units, reflecting a 21% increase over 2016. The share of newly-built flat sales (54%) outweighed old flat transactions, due to the large number of newly constructed units that were built during 2017. In accordance with registered sales transactions, the overall transaction volume grew by 10%, reaching USD 1.17 billion.
    [Show full text]