DOCSLIB.ORG

Georgian Economic Outlook

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Georgian Economic Outlook Ministry of Economic Development of Georgia Country Overview Area: 69 700 sq km Population 2008 E: 4 630 841 Life expectancy: 76.51 years Official language: Georgian Literacy: 100% Capital: Tbilisi Currency (code): Lari (GEL) GDP 2008E: US$ 12.80 billion GDP - real growth rate 2008E: 2.1% GDP - Per Capita 2008 US$ 2 920.3 Inflation rate 2008 (average annual): 10.0% External debt to GDP 2008: 21.4% Ministry of Economic Development of Georgia Liberal Reforms for Long Term Sustainable Growth • Liberal Tax Code Only 6 taxes left Significant procedural and institutional reforms Simplified system of tax disputes discussion • Customs Reform Simplified customs procedures Simplified and sharply reduced the costs connected to the foreign trade Number of import tariffs were abolished on approximetaly 90% of products 3 tariff rates (0%, 5%, 12%) remained No quantitative restrictions (quotas) on imports and exports • Modernized system of Licenses and Permits Number of licenses and permits reduced by 84% Licenses and permits are only used in the production of highly risky goods and services, usage of natural resources and other specific activities Significantly simplified procedures of issuing licenses and permits Introduced “one-stop shop” and “silence is consent” principles Ministry of Economic Development of Georgia Liberal Reforms for Long Term Sustainable Growth • The reform of Technical Regulation System National mandatory standards system was replaced by the voluntary standards, giving entrepreneurs the possibility: – To select the standard for his activities registered in the country – To use the standard of any country or any regional or international standard – To register standards in Georgian National Agency for Standards, Technical Regulations and Metrology and to use them for entrepreneurial activities – To elaborate own standard for new goods, register it in the national agency and use it in entrepreneurial activity – To obtain consultations for the selection and elaboration of standards Declined role of state in the system of technical regulation • Liberal Labor Code – one of the most liberal in the world Simplified relations between employers and employees Significantly reduced hiring and firing expenses Ministry of Economic Development of Georgia Economic Growth Nominal and Real GDP Nominal GDP Per Capita 3500 31.3 35 29.2 26.2 3000 30 15.0 12.3 15 24.9 11.1 2500 25 9.6 9.4 18.2 18.9 10.0 10 2000 20 % 5.9 % 1500 2 920.3 15 USD 2 314.6 bln. USD bln. 5.0 5 1000 1 763.5 10 2.1 1 483.5 1 187.6 500 919 5 4.0 5.1 6.4 7.8 10.2 12.8 0.0 0 0 0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Nominal GDP real GDP Per Capita Growth % GDP growth Components of Nominal GDP 2008 Year 2008 Trade 13.9 Fastest growing sectors of Georgian Economy Agriculture 8.9 • Mining and Quarrying – 17.0% Other 53.0 Manufacturing 8.2 • Communications – 14.5% • Education – 13.7% Transport 6.6 • Trade and repair services – 10.4% Construction Health care 5.3 • Health care and social security – 5.9% 4.1 Ministry of Economic Development of Georgia Consumer Price Index Consumer Price Index 2008 • End of period Inflation – 5.5% • Average annual Inflation – 10% Consumer Price Index Trend 11.0 12 10.0 12 9.2 10 8.2 10 7.0 7.5 8 8 5.6 % 9.2 % 8.8 6 6 6.2 4 5.4 5.7 5.5 4 4.8 2 2 0 0 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Average Annual End of Period Ministry of Economic Development of Georgia Labour Market Unemployment Rate % • Challenge: structural unemployment/job mismatch 20 18 13.8 13.6 • Response: State Programs: 12.6 13.3 16 Vocational Training and Retraining, Development of 14 11.5 12 Professional Training Infrastructure “Professional % 10 8 Education for Employment” (PPP format) 6 “Cheap Credit”, “100 new Agro Industry 4 2 Enterprises” 0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Monthly Salary of Employed in State and Non-state Enterprises • Unemployment rate declined to 13.3% in 2007, down 0.3% y-o-y 500 • Employed population – 1 678.7 thousand, among 442 400 which: 307 306 300 265 Salaried employees – 625.4 thousand (+3.5% 212 194 200 165 141 138 158 07/’06) GEL 100 • Accelerated growth rate of the number of salaried 0 employed and decrease of the number of self- 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 employed State Sector Private Sector Ministry of Economic Development of Georgia Poverty Level Subsistence Level 2004-2008 Subsistence Minimum 140 127.9 • Subsistence Level has increased by 118.6 120 106.5 95.8 51.7% 100 84.3 80 GEL 60 Poverty Level 2004-2008 40 20 0 • Poverty Level has declined by 2.5 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 point Poverty Level • Poverty depth has declined by 1.1 30 24.6 24.1 23.3 point 25 21.3 22.1 20 • Poverty Severity has declined by 0.8 % 15 10 8.1 7.6 7.2 6.9 7.0 point 4.0 3.6 5 3.3 3.2 3.2 0 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Level Depth Severity Ministry of Economic Development of Georgia Foreign Trade Foreign Trade 2008 Foreign Trade Turnover 2003-2008 • Total trade turnover – 7 555.8 mln. USD 56.3 8 45.5 60 39.1 (17.2% increase) 6 36.0 35.3 40 Export – 1 497.7 mln. USD (21.5% increase) 7.5 4 % 6.4 20 Import – 6 058.1 mln. USD (16.2% increase) USD bln. 2 4.6 17.2 1.6 2.5 3.4 In 2004-2008 Georgian trade turnover 0 0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 increased by 203.2% Foreign Trade Turnover Growth Export, Import, Trade Deficit 10 Main Trade Partners 2008 8 45 1200 39.0 35.6 1050 35.7 6 5.21 900 6.06 25.5 3.70 30 750 4 23.5 2.50 600 1.85 USD mln. 12.9 17.4 1.49 450 2 1.14 0.93 1.24 0.79 0.46 0.87 300 0.35 0.65 15 % 0 150 bln. USD bln. 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 0 -2 -0.44 -0.68 -1.20 -1.63 0 -2.77 -4 -3.97 -4.57 Turnover Export Import -6 -15 Export Import Trade Deficit Deficit/GDP (%) Source: Department of Statistics Ministry of Economic Development of Georgia Foreign Trade Foreign Trade With Country Groups 2008 • Foreign trade turnover with EU – • Foreign trade turnover with CIS – 2000.5 mln. USD (10.7% increase) 2542.9 mln. USD (9.9% increase) Export – 335.2 mln. USD (24.8% Export – 542.5 mln. USD increase) (17.4% increase) Import – 1665.3 mln. USD (8.2% Import – 2000.5 mln. USD (8% increase) increase) 3000 2 543 2500 2 314.3 2 000.5 2000 1 792.4 1 807.4 1500 1 404 mln. USD mln. 982.5 1 105.7 1000 792.6 715.8 594.9 491 500 0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 CIS EU Source: Department of Statistics of Georgia Ministry of Economic Development of Georgia Diversified Trade Structure Export structure by country 2008 Import structure by country 2008 Other 19.5 Turkey 17.6 Turkey 15.5 Other 30.8 France 2.7 Ukraine 10.9 UK 2.9 Azerbaijan 13.7 Mexico 3.5 Turkmenistan 2.2 Azerbaijan USA 6.8 10.0 Italy 3.0 Ukraine 9.0 USA 4.0 Germany 7.2 Bulgaria 7.2 UAE 4.5 China 4.9 Russia 7.0 Armenia 8.3 Canada 8.8 Export structure by product 2008 Import structure by product 2008 Oil and oil Ferro-alloys products 12.6 17.8 Oil gases 3.4 Pharmaceuticals 3.1 Bars and roads Scrap metals 1.8 Other 44.2 8.6 Wheat 1.8 Flour 1.2 Manganese ores Ores 7.9 1.2 Other 74.9 Fertilizers 7 Wines 2.5 Gold 6.7 Cement 5.3 Source: Department of Statistics of Georgia Ministry of Economic Development of Georgia Trade Policy Competitive Trade Regimes • Free Trade Regime – with CIS countries and Turkey (since November 1, 2008) • Most Favored Nation Regime (MFN) – with World Trade Organization (WTO) member countries • Preferential Regime (GSP) – with USA, Canada, Japan, Switzerland, Norway • Preferential Regime (GSP+) – with EU (7200 items) since 2005 Possibility of FTA with EU in nearest future Main Features of Georgian Trade Policy • Low import tariffs (90% of goods free from import tariff) • Few export/import licenses and permits • No quantitative restrictions on import and export • No customs tariff on export and re-export • No VAT on export • Simplified export and import procedures Export Promotion Department was established for export facilitation Ministry of Economic Development of Georgia Foreign Direct Investment Year 2008 FDI inflows 2500 25 19.8 • FDI – 1 564 mln. USD 2000 20 15.3 1500 12.2 15 • Reduction – 22.4% 9.7 8.5 % 1000 7.0 2014.8 10 • Share of FDI in GDP – 12.2% 1564.0 mln.USD 500 1190.4 5 340.1 499.1 449.8 Growth in 2003-2008 – 360% 0 0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Growth in 2003-2007 – 492.4% FDI FDI to GDP Pipeline and Non-Pipeline Investments FDI breakdown by origin 2006 2007 2008 UK 15.7% Netherlands 14.9% United Arab Emirates 19.6% 1200 USA 15.3% Czech Republic 11.3% USA 10.7% 973,9 Kazakhstan 12.8% Virgin Islands 9.3% Turkey 10.5% 1000 884 Turkey 10.9% Denmark 7.8% Virgin Islands 10.0% 800 Azerbaijan 6.5% Cyprus 7.4% UK 9.5% 600 Norway 6.5% UK 7.2% Netherlands 8.7% 360 306 Virgin Islands 4.9% UAE 6.5% Switzerland 5.8% 400 231 265 139 185 Italy 4.0% Turkey 4.7% Kazakhstan 4.2% 61 107 109 89,5 200 Denmark 3.6% Russia 4.4% Austria 3.3% mln.
Recommended publications
  • Ports Rail 3

    Ports Rail 3

    68693 Public Disclosure Authorized Caucasus Transport Corridor for Oil and Oil Products Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Prepared by: ECSSD The World Bank Public Disclosure Authorized December 2008 Abbreviations and Acronyms ACG Azeri, Chirag and deepwater Gunashli (oil fields) ADDY Azerbaijan Railway AIOC Azerbaijan International Oil Consortium bpd Barrels per day BTC Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (pipeline) CA or CAR Central Asian Region Caspar Azerbaijan State Caspian Shipping Company CIS Commonwealth of Independent States CNPC China National Petroleum Corporation CPC Caspian Pipeline Consortium (pipeline) dwt Deadweight ton FOB Free on board FSU Former Soviet Union GDP Gross Domestic Product GR Georgian Railway km Kilometer KCTS Kazakhstan Caspian Transport System KMG KazMunaiGaz KMTP Kazmortransflot kV Kilovolt MEP Middle East Petroleum MOU Memorandum of Understanding OECD Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development RTC Rail tank-car RZD Russian Railway SOCAR State Oil Company of Azerbaijan tpa Tons per annum (per year), metric TRACECA Transport Corridor Europe-Caucasus-Asia Vice President, Europe and Central Asia: Shigeo Katsu, ECAVP Country Director: Donna Dowsett-Coirolo, ECCU3 Sector Director: Peter D. Thomson, ECSSD Sector Manager, Transport: Motoo Konishi, ECSSD Task Team Leader: Martha Lawrence, ECSSD I II Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1. CASPIAN OIL TRANSPORT MARKET DYNAMICS Outlook for Caspian Oil Production Transport Options for Caspian Oil 2. CAUCASUS RAIL CORRIDOR—PHYSICAL CONSTRAINTS Ports
  • Flash Reports on Labour Law January 2017 Summary and Country Reports

    Flash Reports on Labour Law January 2017 Summary and Country Reports

    Flash Report 01/2017 Flash Reports on Labour Law January 2017 Summary and country reports EUROPEAN COMMISSION Directorate DG Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion Unit B.2 – Working Conditions Flash Report 01/2017 Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union. Freephone number (*): 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (*) The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone boxes or hotels may charge you). LEGAL NOTICE This document has been prepared for the European Commission however it reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein. More information on the European Union is available on the Internet (http://www.europa.eu). Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2017 ISBN ABC 12345678 DOI 987654321 © European Union, 2017 Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. Flash Report 01/2017 Country Labour Law Experts Austria Martin Risak Daniela Kroemer Belgium Wilfried Rauws Bulgaria Krassimira Sredkova Croatia Ivana Grgurev Cyprus Nicos Trimikliniotis Czech Republic Nataša Randlová Denmark Natalie Videbaek Munkholm Estonia Gaabriel Tavits Finland Matleena Engblom France Francis Kessler Germany Bernd Waas Greece Costas Papadimitriou Hungary Gyorgy Kiss Ireland Anthony Kerr Italy Edoardo Ales Latvia Kristine Dupate Lithuania Tomas Davulis Luxemburg Jean-Luc Putz Malta Lorna Mifsud Cachia Netherlands Barend Barentsen Poland Leszek Mitrus Portugal José João Abrantes Rita Canas da Silva Romania Raluca Dimitriu Slovakia Robert Schronk Slovenia Polonca Končar Spain Joaquín García-Murcia Iván Antonio Rodríguez Cardo Sweden Andreas Inghammar United Kingdom Catherine Barnard Iceland Inga Björg Hjaltadóttir Liechtenstein Wolfgang Portmann Norway Helga Aune Lill Egeland Flash Report 01/2017 Table of Contents Executive Summary ..............................................
  • Georgia Transport Sector Assessment, Strategy, and Road Map

    Georgia Transport Sector Assessment, Strategy, and Road Map

    Georgia Transport Sector Assessment, Strategy, and Road Map The Asian Development Bank (ADB) is preparing sector assessments and road maps to help align future ADB support with the needs and strategies of developing member countries and other development partners. The transport sector assessment of Georgia is a working document that helps inform the development of country partnership strategy. It highlights the development issues, needs and strategic assistance priorities of the transport sector in Georgia. The knowledge product serves as a basis for further dialogue on how ADB and the government can work together to tackle the challenges of managing transport sector development in Georgia in the coming years. About the Asian Development Bank ADB’s vision is an Asia and Pacific region free of poverty. Its mission is to help its developing member countries reduce poverty and improve the quality of life of their people. Despite the region’s many successes, it remains home to two-thirds of the world’s poor: 1.7 billion people who live on less than $2 a day, with 828 million struggling on less than $1.25 a day. Georgia Transport Sector ADB is committed to reducing poverty through inclusive economic growth, environmentally sustainable growth, and regional integration. Based in Manila, ADB is owned by 67 members, including 48 from the region. Its main Assessment, Strategy, instruments for helping its developing member countries are policy dialogue, loans, equity investments, guarantees, grants, and technical assistance. and Road Map TRANSPORT AND COMMUNICATIONS. Georgia. 2014 Asian Development Bank 6 ADB Avenue, Mandaluyong City 1550 Metro Manila, Philippines www.adb.org Printed in the Philippines Georgia Transport Sector Assessment, Strategy, and Road Map © 2014 Asian Development Bank All rights reserved.
  • In the Baltic States

    In the Baltic States

    A comparative review of socio-economic implications of the coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19) in the Baltic States 2020 Table of Contents 1. The uneven geography of the crisis: economic effects in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania .... 3 2. Key factors in overcoming the crisis and the potential long-term economic impact ......... 8 3. The bright side: opportunities arising from the crisis ...................................................... 14 4. Possible coordinated actions of the three Baltic States to build back better .................. 16 This review is a joint work of Foresight Centre of Parliament of Estonian, LV PEAK of the University of Latvia and Government Strategic Analysis Center (STRATA) of Lithuania. The review was finalized in October 2020. 2 Introduction and aims The COVID-19 crisis has been a true black swan – an unexpected event that is having enormous consequences on virtually every aspect of our daily life. Next to the 1918 flu pandemic that occurred in a very differenc socio-economic context, there are no historical parallels close to the current crisis, which makes forecasting and future prediction a tough task. Due to the global scale of the crisis, the collaboration and joint efforts are at the heart of solutions to the COVID-19 situation. Close cooperation is especially important in the Baltic region with highly interconnected economies and societies. This paper aims to provide a comparative picture of the effects of the crisis and describe the key factors and uncertainties affecting the recovery. Despite the sharp recession, there are also some opportunities arising from the situation, which are discussed in the third section of the paper.
  • Health Systems in Transition

    Health Systems in Transition

    61575 Latvia HiT_2_WEB.pdf 1 03/03/2020 09:55 Vol. 21 No. 4 2019 Vol. Health Systems in Transition Vol. 21 No. 4 2019 Health Systems in Transition: in Transition: Health Systems C M Y CM MY CY CMY K Latvia Latvia Health system review Daiga Behmane Alina Dudele Anita Villerusa Janis Misins The Observatory is a partnership, hosted by WHO/Europe, which includes other international organizations (the European Commission, the World Bank); national and regional governments (Austria, Belgium, Finland, Kristine Klavina Ireland, Norway, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the Veneto Region of Italy); other health system organizations (the French National Union of Health Insurance Funds (UNCAM), the Dzintars Mozgis Health Foundation); and academia (the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE) and the Giada Scarpetti London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (LSHTM)). The Observatory has a secretariat in Brussels and it has hubs in London at LSE and LSHTM) and at the Berlin University of Technology. HiTs are in-depth profiles of health systems and policies, produced using a standardized approach that allows comparison across countries. They provide facts, figures and analysis and highlight reform initiatives in progress. Print ISSN 1817-6119 Web ISSN 1817-6127 61575 Latvia HiT_2_WEB.pdf 2 03/03/2020 09:55 Giada Scarpetti (Editor), and Ewout van Ginneken (Series editor) were responsible for this HiT Editorial Board Series editors Reinhard Busse, Berlin University of Technology, Germany Josep Figueras, European
  • YOUTH POLICY IMPLEMENTATION at the LOCAL LEVEL: IMERETI and TBILISI © Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung

    YOUTH POLICY IMPLEMENTATION at the LOCAL LEVEL: IMERETI and TBILISI © Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung

    YOUTH POLICY IMPLEMENTATION AT THE LOCAL LEVEL: IMERETI AND TBILISI © Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung This Publication is funded by Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung. The views expressed in this publication are not necessarily those of the Friedrich-Ebert Stiftung. Commercial use of all media published by the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung (FES) is not permitted without the written consent of the FES. YOUTH POLICY IMPLEMENTATION AT THE LOCAL LEVEL: IMERETI AND TBILISI Tbilisi 2020 Youth Policy Implementation at the Local Level: Imereti and Tbilisi Tbilisi 2020 PUBLISHERS Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, South Caucasus South Caucasus Regional Offi ce Ramishvili Str. Blind Alley 1, #1, 0179 http://www.fes-caucasus.org Tbilisi, Georgia Analysis and Consulting Team (ACT) 8, John (Malkhaz) Shalikashvili st. Tbilisi, 0131, Georgia Parliament of Georgia, Sports and Youth Issues Committee Shota Rustaveli Avenue #8 Tbilisi, Georgia, 0118 FOR PUBLISHER Felix Hett, FES, Salome Alania, FES AUTHORS Plora (Keso) Esebua (ACT) Sopho Chachanidze (ACT) Giorgi Rukhadze (ACT) Sophio Potskhverashvili (ACT) DESIGN LTD PolyGraph, www.poly .ge TYPESETTING Gela Babakishvili TRANSLATION & PROOFREADING Lika Lomidze Eter Maghradze Suzanne Graham COVER PICTURE https://www.freepik.com/ PRINT LTD PolyGraph PRINT RUN 150 pcs ISBN 978-9941-8-2018-2 Attitudes, opinions and conclusions expressed in this publication- not necessarily express attitudes of the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung. Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung does not vouch for the accuracy of the data stated in this publication. © Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung 2020 FOREWORD Youth is important. Many hopes are attached to the “next generation” – societies tend to look towards the young to bring about a value change, to get rid of old habits, and to lead any country into a better future.
  • Understanding the Need for Good Planning Project Newsletter #2

    Understanding the Need for Good Planning Project Newsletter #2

    Integrated Solid Waste Management Kutaisi - Project Newsletter # 2- May 2017 News ევროკავშირი საქართველოსთვის The European Union for Georgia SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT Ministry of Regional Development and COMPANY OF GEORGIA Infrastructure of Georgia Project nanced by KfW and Government of Georgia and supported with funding by Project implemented by consortium leaders PEM Consult and ERM Landll Operators the European Union Understanding the need for good planning Project Newsletter #2 Starting from November 2016, the team of the project “Inte- Imereti region journalists and media grated Solid Waste Management Kutasisi – Accompanying learn about the new regional waste management system Page 2 Measures Consulting (AMC) Services” is hosting a series of training courses for all municipalities in Imereti and Racha- Safer and healthier working Lechkhumi and Kvemo Svaneti Regions. In our interview with conditions for over 200 Mr. René Boesten, the team leader of the project, explains the landll sta Page 2 training programme Municipal Waste Manage- ment Plan Training - mid Mr. Boesten, what is the main landll. A third priority is to set up fair term review Page 3 purpose and reason for this training and manageable systems for the OHS and EMS commitment programme? waste service charge that citizens (and of SWMCG Page 4 In accordance with the Waste Code of hotels etc.) have to pay for the collection The waste management Georgia, the municipalities have to and safe disposal of waste. system in Georgia - Main develop municipal waste management Separate collection and recycling will responsibilities of the involved plans in order to better manage and become obligatory in 2019. Are the parties Page 4 control municipal waste collection, and municipalities prepared? SWMCG website in future also recycling.
  • Economic Prosperity Initiative

    Economic Prosperity Initiative

    USAID/GEORGIA DO2: Inclusive and Sustainable Economic Growth October 1, 2011 – September 31, 2012 Gagra Municipal (regional) Infrastructure Development (MID) ABKHAZIA # Municipality Region Project Title Gudauta Rehabilitation of Roads 1 Mtskheta 3.852 km; 11 streets : Mtskheta- : Mtanee Rehabilitation of Roads SOKHUMI : : 1$Mestia : 2 Dushet 2.240 km; 7 streets :: : ::: Rehabilitation of Pushkin Gulripshi : 3 Gori street 0.92 km : Chazhashi B l a c k S e a :%, Rehabilitaion of Gorijvari : 4 Gori Shida Kartli road 1.45 km : Lentekhi Rehabilitation of Nationwide Projects: Ochamchire SAMEGRELO- 5 Kareli Sagholasheni-Dvani 12 km : Highway - DCA Basisbank ZEMO SVANETI RACHA-LECHKHUMI rehabilitaiosn Roads in Oni Etseri - DCA Bank Republic Lia*#*# 6 Oni 2.452 km, 5 streets *#Sachino : KVEMO SVANETI Stepantsminda - DCA Alliance Group 1$ Gali *#Mukhuri Tsageri Shatili %, Racha- *#1$ Tsalenjikha Abari Rehabilitation of Headwork Khvanchkara #0#0 Lechkhumi - DCA Crystal Obuji*#*# *#Khabume # 7 Oni of Drinking Water on Oni for Nakipu 0 Likheti 3 400 individuals - Black Sea Regional Transmission ZUGDIDI1$ *# Chkhorotsku1$*# ]^!( Oni Planning Project (Phase 2) Chitatskaro 1$!( Letsurtsume Bareuli #0 - Georgia Education Management Project (EMP) Akhalkhibula AMBROLAURI %,Tsaishi ]^!( *#Lesichine Martvili - Georgia Primary Education Project (G-Pried) MTSKHETA- Khamiskuri%, Kheta Shua*#Zana 1$ - GNEWRC Partnership Program %, Khorshi Perevi SOUTH MTIANETI Khobi *# *#Eki Khoni Tskaltubo Khresili Tkibuli#0 #0 - HICD Plus #0 ]^1$ OSSETIA 1$ 1$!( Menji *#Dzveli
  • Minority Rights After EU Enlargement: a Comparison of Antigay Politics in Poland and Latvia

    Minority Rights After EU Enlargement: a Comparison of Antigay Politics in Poland and Latvia

    Original Article Minority rights after EU enlargement: A comparison of antigay politics in Poland and Latvia Conor O’Dwyer* and Katrina Z.S. Schwartz Department of Political Science, University of Florida, 234 Anderson Hall, PO Box 117325, Gainesville, Florida 32611-7325, USA. E-mails: [email protected], [email protected] *Corresponding author. Abstract This paper examines the recent backlash against gay rights in Poland and Latvia as a test case of the depth and breadth of ‘europeanization’ in the new postcommunist member-states of the European Union (EU). We argue that antigay mobilization in these countries constitutes illiberal governance (and thus a failure of europeanization) on three grounds: failure of institutional protections for sexual minorities, broad inclusion of illiberal elites in mainstream politics and virulence of antigay rhetoric by political elites in the public sphere. To explain the stalled europeanization of nondiscrimination norms regarding sexual minorities, we apply two analytical models widely used to explain successful norm adoption in other policy areas: the ‘external incentives’ and ‘social learning’ models. We find that in the case of gay rights, EU conditionality was weak, and national identity and ‘resonance’ operated against norm adoption, as did domestic institutions (namely, weakly institutionalized party systems). The EU might have overcome these obstacles through persuasion, but deliberative processes were lacking. Our analysis suggests that some of the key factors underlying both models of norm adoption operate differently in the new, postaccession context, and that social learning is likely to play a greater role in postaccession europeanization. Comparative European Politics (2010) 8, 220–243. doi:10.1057/cep.2008.31 Keywords: Latvia; Poland; sexual minorities; European Union; europeanization; illiberalism Introduction In May 2004, Poland and Latvia joined the European Union (EU), ending a long process in which the strength of their democratic institutions was carefully tested and validated by the European Commission.
  • News Digest on Georgia

    News Digest on Georgia

    NEWS DIGEST ON GEORGIA April 18-21 Compiled by: Aleksandre Davitashvili Date: April 22, 2019 Occupied Regions Abkhazia Region 1. Syria plans to enhance cooperation with occupied Abkhazia and South Ossetia Syria hopes to enhance its cooperation with Abkhazia and South Ossetia and sees a huge potential in it – Syrian Minister of Economy and Foreign Trade Samer al-Khalil said during an economic forum in Yalta, occupied Crimea of Ukraine. “I think we will be able to further develop cooperation with Abkhazia and South Ossetia within the economic treaties. We have a lot of cooperation opportunities, but there are a number of difficulties that we have to overcome, “he said. “During the last year, Syria could develop relations with Abkhazia and South Ossetia in the economy and other fields and to establish new channels,” Samer al-Khalil said (1TV, April 19, 2019). Tskhinvali Region (so called South Ossetia) 2. UN Ambassadors Meet President Zurabishvili, Visit Occupation Line President Salome Zurabishvili received permanent representatives from the Dominican Republic, Eswatini, Finland, Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia and Senegal to the United Nations. The Ambassadors are visiting Georgia on April 14-21. According to Zurabishvili’s press office, the ambassadors were briefed on Georgia’s EU integration process, as well as on the human rights and security situation in the occupied regions of Abkhazia and Tskhinvali Region/South Ossetia (Civil.ge, April 18, 2019). 3. Georgian occupied Tskhinvali region eager to open Damascus “embassy” The Georgian occupied Tskhinvali (South Ossetia) region has plans to open a so-called embassy in Damascus Syria, after the latter became the fifth worldwide to recognise Tskhinvali as an independent state in May 2018.
  • Cultural-Humanitarian Fund “Sukhumi”

    Cultural-Humanitarian Fund “Sukhumi”

    Cultural -Humanitarian Fund “Sukhumi” (The results of the rapid assessment conducted by the Fund “Sukhumi” in its target regions) Ekaterine Gamakharia Fund “Sukhumi” 5/1/2020 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................... 2 1. Methodology and Demographics ............................................................................................................. 3 2. Key Findings .............................................................................................................................................. 4 2.1. Negative Impact of Covid-19 on the People’s Lives .......................................................................... 4 2.2. Covid-19 Impact on Gender Roles – Unequal Distribution of the Household Responsibilities ........ 5 2.3. Covid-19 Impact on Economic Security............................................................................................. 6 2.4. Covid-19 Impact on the Possibility to Receive Education ................................................................. 8 2.5. Covid-19 Impact on the Physical Safety of Women – Increased Domestic Violence ....................... 9 2.6. Covid-19 Impact on Food Security .................................................................................................. 11 2.7. Covid-19 Impact on Health Security ................................................................................................ 12 2.8. Covid-19 Impact on
  • Projev T Pstross Anglicky

    Projev T Pstross Anglicky

    Ladies and Gentlemen, Today we mark the anniversary of the proclamation of the Czech Republic that took place on 28 October 1918, and we do so in a year that is of extraordinary importance in terms of contacts between the Czech Republic and Latvia: this year, exactly 90 years have passed since our countries established diplomatic relations, and 20 years since their restoration in the year 1991. This provides an occasion to reflect on the achievements within our mutual relationship, on what binds us together and what awaits us in the future. The high standard of quality and friendly nature of our relations is a long-lasting tradition. Both our independent states were born at the same moment, and in the twenty inter-war years they moved closer in many areas of cooperation. The aspirations of independent Latvia for economic and cultural development found many proponents among us. Many of them tirelessly promoted your culture, which, until then, had been virtually unknown to us. Trade evolved, and Czech industrial products earned a steady place within the Latvian market. Latvia was perceived in our country as the natural centre of gravity of the southern Baltics and, among other things, as a potential economic springboard into the Russian space. In the context of the foreign policy orientation of pre-war Czechoslovakia, Latvia did indeed occupy a peripheral, yet never a marginal, place. The subsequent trajectory of this relationship was affected by the loss of both countries’ independence on the eve of World War II and the ramifications this brought along. The restoration of Czech-Latvian relations at the level of sovereign and independent states was only enabled by the collapse of the Soviet empire in the early 1990s.