Georgia Gender Analysis

May 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACRONYMS ...... 4

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...... 7

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 8

INTRODUCTION ...... 14

Purpose and Scope of the Gender Analysis ...... 14 Methodology and Limitations ...... 14

USAID MISSION CONTEXT...... 15

GEORGIA’S PROGRESS TOWARD GENDER EQUALITY ...... 16

Population Data ...... 16 International Indices ...... 18 International Obligations and Gender Equality Goals ...... 19 National Law, Policy, and Institutions on Gender Equality...... 20 Gender Stereotypes ...... 24 Donor Coordination and Gender Mainstreaming ...... 25

SECTOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS ...... 26

Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance ...... 26

Women in Government ...... 26 Incentivizing Women’s Participation ...... 29 Women in Civil Society and Media ...... 30 Violence Against Women (VAW), Gender-Based Violence (GBV) ...... 31 Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Intersex Persons (LGBTI) ...... 33 Trafficking In Persons (TIP) and Outmigration ...... 33 Women, Peace, and Security ...... 33

Economic Growth and Opportunities ...... 35

Poverty and Women ...... 35 Labor Market and Migration ...... 35 Discrimination in the Workplace ...... 37 Horizontal and Vertical Segregation ...... 38 Pay Gap...... 39 Family Obligations ...... 40 Loans and Credit ...... 41 Land and Agriculture...... 41 Entrepreneurship and Business Climate ...... 41

Social Development ...... 43

Georgia Gender Analysis - 2 - USAID/Georgia

Health ...... 43 Education ...... 44

Cross-Cutting Findings ...... 48

Men and Gender Relations ...... 48 Women in Minority Communities ...... 48 Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) ...... 49 Female Youth and Early Marriage ...... 49

SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS...... 52

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR GENDER INTEGRATION ...... 54

General Recommendations ...... 54 Programmatic Recommendations ...... 54 Organizational Recommendations ...... 56

ANNEX 1: LIST OF KEY DECISIONS OF THE GOVERNMENT OF GEORGIA RELATED TO GENDER EQUALITY AND FEMALE EMPOWERMENT...... 57

ANNEX 2: WOMEN’S ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND ECONOMIC EMPOWERMENT ACT ...... 60

ANNEX 3: THE WOMEN’S GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT AND PROSPERITY (W- GDP) INITIATIVE...... 61

ANNEX 4: BIBLIOGRAPHY...... 63

Georgia Gender Analysis - 3 - USAID/Georgia

ACRONYMS

ABL Administrative Boundary Line

ADB Asian Development Bank

ADS Automated Directives System

AIDS Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome

AOR Agreement Officer’s Representative

BPFA Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action

CDCS Country Development Coordination Strategy

CEDAW Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women

CIS Commonwealth of Independent States

COBERM Confidence Building Early Response Mechanism

COR Contracting Officer’s Representative

DO Development Objective

DV Domestic Violence

E&E Europe and Eurasia

EU European Union FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations FGM/C Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting

GBV Gender-Based Violence

GDP Gross Domestic Product

GEC Gender Equality Council

GEL Georgian Lari

GIA Gender Impact Assessment

GII Gender Inequality Index

GIS Geographic Information System

GTG Gender Theme Group

GYLA Georgian Young Lawyers' Association

HDI Human Development Index

Georgia Gender Analysis - 4 - USAID/Georgia

HIV Human Immunodeficiency Virus

HR Human Resources

IDP Internally Displaced Persons

ILO International Labour Organization

INL Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (U.S. Department of State)

IOM International Organization for Migration

IPU Inter-Parliamentary Union

IPV Intimate Partner Violence

IRI International Republican Institute

LGBTI Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Intersex

MES Ministry of Education, Science, Culture, and Sport of Georgia

MDG Millennium Development Goals

MMR Maternal Mortality Ratio

MOIA Ministry of Internal Affairs of Georgia

MP Member of Parliament

NAP National Action Plan

NCD Non-Communicable Disease

NDI National Democratic Institute

NGO Nongovernmental Organization

OECD Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development

OPIC Overseas Private Investment Corporation

PITA Promoting Integration, Tolerance, and Awareness Program professional skills

PWD People With Disabilities

RF Results Framework

SDG Sustainable Development Goal

SIGI Social Institutions and Gender Index

STEM Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics

Georgia Gender Analysis - 5 - USAID/Georgia

UN United Nations

UNAIDS Joint United Nations Programme on HIV and AIDS

UNDP United Nations Development Programme

UNFPA United Nations Population Fund

UNSCR U.N. Security Council Resolution

U.S. United States

USAID United States Agency for International Development

VAW Violence Against Women

V-DEM Varieties of Democracy

WDI World Development Indicators

W-GDP Women’s Global Development and Prosperity Initiative

WHO World Health Organization

WIC Women’s Information Center

WISG Women's Initiatives Supporting Group

WEF World Economic Forum

WPS Women, Peace, and Security

WWD Women With Disabilities

WWEI Women’s Workplace Equality Index

Georgia Gender Analysis - 6 - USAID/Georgia

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This report draws on the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of USAID/Georgia’s multiple gender and youth analyses. In this respect, special thanks go to Sarah Richardson, Brent Edelman, and Jay Totte with USAID/Georgia for their work over the last few years. The Mission recognizes the valuable research efforts of the Georgian and international organizations cited in the footnotes and fully referenced in the bibliography. Maia Khatiashvili, USAID/Georgia’s GIS Specialist, has greatly assisted the analysis by creating geospatial maps on women’s political participation at the local level and the incidence of intimate partner violence against women in Georgia. Finally, sincere thanks to Lubov Fajfer—the Senior Education, Gender, and Vulnerable Groups Advisor with USAID's Bureau for Europe and Eurasia—for her overall guidance, feedback, and insights.

Cover photographs: Provided by USAID’s implementing partners in Georgia.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 7 - USAID/Georgia

“When women do better, countries do better, communities do better, and families do better."

Mark Green, USAID Administrator

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Georgia is a steadfast U.S. ally in the region. Building on more than 25 years of partnership, the U.S. government remains committed to supporting Georgia’s democratic development, sustainable reforms, and Euro-Atlantic integration. Accordingly, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) has worked with local institutions to strengthen and sustain Georgia’s democratic, free-market, and Western-oriented transformation. As a matter of policy, USAID has ensured gender integration into its development projects and strategies, including the 2013-2020 Country Development Cooperation Strategy (CDCS) for Georgia.

Embarking on the development of a new, five-year CDCS for Georgia, USAID seeks to advance Georgia’s journey to self-reliance through partnerships that bolster its capacity to plan, finance, and implement solutions to the country’s development challenges. In this regard, women can play a paradigmatic role as agents of development. USAID’s Mission in Georgia has carried out a macro-level gender analysis to identify the main gender inequalities and barriers, as well as opportunities to advance gender equality and female empowerment across all sectors of the CDCS. The analysis synthesizes research findings from a range of internal and third-party data sources in the form of a desk study, and the Mission plans to integrate them, along with the related recommendations, into the strategy.

Over the past few years, Georgia has made notable progress in furthering gender mainstreaming efforts, demonstrating the type of commitment that is crucial to turning the tide for disadvantaged women and girls. In terms of Georgia’s journey to ultimate self-reliance, these efforts are critical steps in the right direction. Georgia is a signatory to many international human rights instruments, including the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. The Parliament of Georgia has set up institutional mechanisms, such as the Gender Equality Council (GEC), to improve the legislative and regulatory framework for gender equality; the Georgian government has worked with civil society and donor agencies to address some of the most pressing issues, including violence against women; the judiciary has achieved near equality in its judicial branch; and the discourse on gender equality has been gaining ground steadily in the public and private sectors.

Regardless, Georgia lags behind many of its neighbors in Eastern Europe and post-Soviet space in international gender-related indices. To name a few, Georgia’s ranking in the World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Gap Index dropped from 54th in 2006 to 99th in 2018; it ranks as low as 139th in the Inter-Parliamentary Union’s list of 193 countries classified by the percentage of women in national legislatures; and its ranking in the UNDP’s Gender Inequality Index dropped from a score of 0.426 in 1995 to 0.350 in 2017 (ranked 78th out of 160 countries). Those on the margins of mainstream society (e.g. people with disabilities, internally displaced persons, and others) deal with dual discrimination caused by their identity and status, and Georgian youth face persistent challenges in finding employment. The conclusions below provide further details based on the findings of the study.1

1 Detailed findings can be found in the main body of the report.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 8 - USAID/Georgia

Conclusions

Laws, policies, regulations, and institutional practices & patterns of power and decision-making

 Georgia has made great strides in improving the enabling environment for gender equality and female empowerment. In 2010, the country adopted the Law on Gender Equality; in 2014, it passed the Law on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination; and in 2017, Georgia ratified the Istanbul Convention of the Council of Europe. The GEC spearheaded the process of developing and adopting national action plans on gender equality and women, peace, and security.  In spite of the afore-mentioned progress, notable gaps remain in the enforcement of the adopted gender policies and commitments. They limit the degree to which the country is able to turn gains in policymaking into transformative changes for women and girls.  As multiple sources indicate, Georgia scores very low on women’s political participation, especially at the local level. Few women are represented in the legislature and executive as decision-makers. In contrast, 53 percent of judges are women. Political parties do little to incentivize women’s participation in elections and political activities.  Gender disparities affect women entering the labor market, as they have to deal with the pay gap, horizontal and vertical segregation, the glass ceiling, and discrimination in the workplace (including discriminatory recruitment policies, harassment, and biases based on sex or sexual orientation). Although the pay gap has been decreasing, it remains as high as 37 percent. It is largely attributed to discrimination in the labor market and the fact that Georgian law does not recognize explicitly the principle of equal work for equal value. Consequently, women’s participation in the labor market is low—the Labour Force Participation Rate is at 57.9 percent for women and 78.9 percent for men.  Economic activity is the highest among women in the 45-54 year old age group (77 percent) and among men in the 25-34 age group (89 percent). For both women and men, the highest unemployment rate is observed in the 15-24 year old age group.

Cultural norms and beliefs

 Notwithstanding the growing discourse on gender equality in both public and private sectors, rigid gender stereotypes about the roles of women and men still prevail in Georgian society.  Despite its illegality, Georgia has a high rate of child/early marriage in some rural and minority communities (with Kvemo Kartli having the highest incidence).  Ethnic and religious minorities (and particularly women in these communities); women and men with disabilities; internally displaced persons; lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex persons face dual discrimination due to their gender identity and status.  Research shows that sex selection occurs in rural and ethnic minority areas and some Georgian communities. In 2018, the sex ratio for 0-4 year olds was 108 boys for every 100 girls in Georgia.  Across the country, violence is a common experience in many women’s lives. One in seven women aged 15-64 has experienced physical, sexual and/or emotional violence by an intimate partner; one in five women has experienced at least one form of sexual harassment. The highest reported rates of intimate partner violence are in Tbilisi and Samtskhe-Javakheti, the lowest—in Guria and Ajara.  Nearly all schools have a low number of male teachers, possibly leading students to believe that teaching is mainly a woman’s job. Gender stereotypes and prejudices affect students through textbooks, teachers, and parents. There is a lack of gender training for in- or pre-service teachers.  As the vast majority of girls (85-92 percent) are taught the so-called female jobs (i.e. cooking, cleaning the apartment, or doing laundry) during adolescence, boys are encouraged to focus on activities that are deemed more appropriate for men (e.g. business activities or agricultural work).

Georgia Gender Analysis - 9 - USAID/Georgia

Gender roles, responsibilities, and time use

 Leadership roles of women are limited. Many Georgian citizens agree that women are not brought up to be leaders and that men make better politicians and better business executives.  Young girls and boys migrate (both within and outside of Georgia) more than other age categories, with most migration occurring between 20-24 years. Female youth migrate twice as much as males, and they mainly migrate from rural to urban areas. Of every 100 Georgian migrants 67 are women, most of whom leave for European countries. Between 1990 and 2016, Georgia’s 15-24 year old population shrank by 37 percent.  Studies indicate that women in the paid workforce are far more likely than men to face the double burden of undertaking significant domestic labor on top of paid employment. There are few examples of men and women sharing care responsibilities.  In general, persons living in households headed by women are more likely to be less well off than those living in households headed by men. Nearly 27 percent of Georgia’s population live in female- headed households, and 50 percent of women heads of household are economically active.  Solidarity between organizations is lacking to lobby the Georgian government around a shared gender equality and women’s rights platform. Civil society groups working on gender issues are active in Tbilisi, but there is a need for greater social mobilization in other parts of Georgia.

Access to and control over assets and resources

 Women in Georgia need support to succeed as entrepreneurs, breaking through the established gender stereotypes and barriers.  Educational attainments of female students, outperforming their male peers at all levels, do not lead to better employment opportunities. Men are more likely to be successful in getting higher-paid and higher-ranking jobs, and women are less likely to participate in company ownership or management.  Georgia has high primary and secondary education enrollment rates for girls and boys, but they drop at the tertiary level. Studies highlight relatively low enrolment rates and high rates of early dropouts among female students in the Azerbaijani and Kist minority communities.  As a result of concerted government and donor efforts, Georgia has drastically reduced its maternal mortality ratio and infant mortality rate over the last decade.  The majority of women live to over 80 years old, outliving men by almost nine years. Men are more adversely affected by circulatory system and ischemic heart diseases, as well as tobacco and alcohol consumption. Non-communicable diseases are the leading causes of death of women of reproductive age in Georgia.

General Recommendations

Women make up more than half of Georgia’s aging and shrinking population. The Georgian institutions need capacity building support to overcome the barriers to women and girls’ full and equitable participation to advance its journey to self-reliance. In addition to mandatory gender integration into the CDCS and the program cycle, the Mission should make intended efforts to identify specific opportunities (either under larger projects or as discrete activities) to effect change for women and girls. For instance, these could include initiatives developed in response to the Women’s Entrepreneurship and Economic Empowerment Act signed into law by President Trump on January 9, 2019 (see Annex 2); the Women’s Global Development and Prosperity (W-GDP) Initiative (Annex 3); partnerships with the private sector to develop innovative, locally-driven approaches or to link up with the global ones that have already proven effective; or capacity building support to the state institutions that are facing challenges in the implementation of adopted gender policies. It goes without saying that

Georgia Gender Analysis - 10 - USAID/Georgia

whatever the interventions, their design should consider the plight of disadvantaged women and who may be facing excessive discrimination due to their status or age.

The Mission should also continue building on the success and lessons learned from the past and ongoing interventions (e.g. the work on gender impact assessments, gender-related research, empowering women’s participation in the judiciary, discrimination in the workplace, and measures to reduce the incidence of domestic violence). As applicable, it should also plan more nuanced project or activity level analyses to explore further some of the issues identified herein. Programmatic Recommendations

Outcome1: Reductions in gaps between males and females in access to/control over economic, political, and social resources

Capacity Commitment

 Gaps between policymaking and  Gender-sensitive policies: Support gender- implementation: Work with the Georgian sensitive policies that increase the number of government, the Parliament of Georgia, civil women parliamentarians (e.g. a quota system society, and donor agencies to close the or family-friendly policies that factor in identified gaps in the implementation of gender women’s childcare responsibilities), improve policies and action plans at different levels. gender-responsive budgeting practices, and  Women’s participation in local self- draw on gender impact assessments. governance: Provide capacity building  Line ministries: Encourage line ministries to assistance to the gender equality councils develop sector-specific action plans aimed at within local councils (i.e. sakrebulos), starting increasing women’s access to economic, with the definition of their mandate since the educational and other opportunities. law does not specify their roles and  Political parties: Work with political parties to responsibilities institutionalize women’s wings, include more  The private sector: Explore partnership women in party councils, develop outreach opportunities with the private sector to strategies targeting female voters, disaggregate advance women’s economic empowerment. party lists by sex, and develop rules for These could be similar to global initiatives such women’s promotion and career advancement. as the Goldman Sachs 10,000 Women  Equal pay for equal work: Explore Initiative or the Nike Foundation’s work on opportunities to address the persistent pay the Girl Effect. The potential of such public- gap, working with the Georgian government to private partnerships to benefit women is great eradicate this disparity (which runs counter to but remains underutilized. Georgia’s international commitments, including  Civil society: Strengthen civil society actors to those made under the EU Association increase women’s political and economic Agreement), the private sector to address the participation; encourage women’s issue in their recruitment and employment organizations to coalesce around shared goals; policies, and research institutions to explore work strategically within the political system; the impact on those suffering from double and lobby the national and local authorities for discrimination. gender-sensitive policies, regulations, and  Media and public awareness: Work with news decisions that are followed through. outlets to eliminate gender discriminatory  Participation of women from minorities: approaches, support educational campaigns Work with local institutions to ensure that focus on women’s rights and women’s minority women have access to information political and economic participation, and

Georgia Gender Analysis - 11 - USAID/Georgia

about political and economic participation, promote business paths for women engaging youth and educating communities entrepreneurs and high-profile business about opportunities to get involved in non- leaders to encourage women’s involvement in traditional sectors. non-traditional sectors.

Outcome 2: Reductions in the prevalence of gender-based violence (GBV)

Capacity Commitment

 State actors: Continue building the capacity of  Discrimination in the workplace: Work with the State Fund for Protection and Assistance the Georgian government and other of Victims of Human Trafficking and other development actors to increase protection for state actors to implement effectively the women’s rights to equality in the workplace, National Action Plans for Combating Violence focusing on pre-employment relations, equal against Women and Domestic Violence. pay for equal work, right to leave for family  Social workers: Enhance the capacity of social members with childcare responsibilities, and workers who are at the forefront of action against sexual harassment at workplace. preventing GBV and working with the victims  Coordination: Continue close coordination of GBV. with other donor (UN Women, Heinrich Boell  Violence and harassment in schools: Assist the Foundation, etc.) and U.S. agencies (e.g. government entities and school Bureau of International Narcotics and Law administrations to build effective Enforcement Affairs and the Department of communication channels addressing the cases Justice) working on GBV issues. of violence and harassment.

Outcome 3: Reductions in constraints that prevent women and girls from leading, participating fully in, and influencing decisions in their societies

Capacity Commitment

 Women’s soft skills: Support training efforts  Labor market: Support institutional policies that bolster women’s leadership, self-esteem, and practices that that increase women’s labor self-efficacy, and confidence to pursue political force participation. careers (building on training in hard political  Gender disparities and stereotypes in skills). education: Work with state and non-state  Women’s entrepreneurship skills: Provide actors to ensure equitable access to education training to women-owned businesses to share for minorities and high-need schools; address know-how and developments in local and gender stereotypes in textbooks; and provide international business trends, explore formal gender training for civil servants, pre- and in- and informal education means to link up service teachers, and parents. These activities female students with potential employers, and should be combined with civic education assist women’s business associations with efforts. transition from start-ups to scaled-up  Female role models and male champions: businesses. Engage women leaders and male champions of  Youth: Support young boys and girls, who are gender equality in advocacy efforts aimed at a particularly susceptible to unemployment, to wider participation of women in decision- address the age-specific challenges. making and policy development.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 12 - USAID/Georgia

Organizational Recommendations

 Encourage the Contracting Officer’s Representatives (CORs) and Agreement Officer’s Representatives (AORs) to undertake the Agency’s training courses on Gender Equality and Female Empowerment and GBV.  Carry out more nuanced, sector-specific gender analyses at the project and/or activity level.  Coordinate gender integration efforts in the technical offices via designated points of contact.  Uphold the practice of including the Mission’s Gender Advisor in project and/or activity design teams to ensure compliance with the Agency requirements for gender integration.  Continue engaging with donor agencies and other development actors.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 13 - USAID/Georgia

INTRODUCTION

Purpose and Scope of the Gender Analysis

USAID’s Mission in Georgia is developing a new, five-year Country Development Coordination Strategy (CDCS). In accordance with USAID’s Automated Directives System (ADS) 201, ADS 205, and the Agency’s Gender Equality and Female Empowerment Policy, the gender analysis is one of the four required analyses for CDCS development. The purpose of the Georgia Gender Analysis is to identify key barriers to gender equality and female empowerment and recommend ways in which the new CDCS concept paper, Results Framework (RF), and the subsequent full strategy can address them. Drawing on the available research, the analysis explores macro and relevant sectoral level societal gender inequalities in Georgia, and recommends actions that seek to answer the following questions:

- What are the main gender inequalities facing Georgia considering the five domains of analysis below? o Laws, policies, regulations, and institutional practices that influence the context in which men and women act and make decisions; o Cultural norms and beliefs; o Gender roles, responsibilities, and time use; o Access to and control over assets and resources; and o Patterns of power and decision-making.

- How can the CDCS address these inequalities to contribute to the development outcomes below? o Reductions in gaps between males and females in access to/control over economic, political, and social resources; o Reductions in the prevalence of gender-based violence; and o Reductions in constraints that prevent women and girls from leading, participating fully in, and influencing decisions in their societies. Methodology and Limitations

The Georgia Gender Analysis is based on a desk study that synthesizes data from the internal and third- party sources relevant to the afore-mentioned purpose. In close coordination with the Senior Education, Gender, and Vulnerable Groups Advisor of USAID's Bureau for Europe and Eurasia (E&E) and colleagues with USAID/Georgia, the Mission’s Gender Advisor led the desk review in compliance with Agency requirements.

The Mission made a decision not to carry out a separate, country-wide macro level gender analysis because numerous actors, including USAID and its partners, have already conducted extensive research on gender relations in Georgia. Over the last several years, the Mission has completed multiple gender and youth analyses in different sectors, including economic governance and leadership, elections and political participation, and basic education. Other major donor agencies and international and local organizations, such as the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank (ADB), United Nations (UN) agencies, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN (FAO), the Public Defender of Georgia, etc. have also completed country-wide and sector-specific gender assessments, analyses, and surveys. Together with the international gender indices for Georgia and official national-level data and statistics, these sources constitute a rigorous and robust body of evidence that the Mission has considered to carry out the required gender analysis.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 14 - USAID/Georgia

In terms of limitations, it is important to note that while the analysis seeks to identify the relevant macro level data and gender inequalities, it leaves room for further, more in-depth scrutiny of sector-specific issues at the project or activity level. Therefore, it will be incumbent on the respective project and/or activity design teams to consider more nuanced analyses to unpack the overarching issues described herein. Conclusions are strictly drawn from the reviewed sources and they do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. government.

USAID MISSION CONTEXT

Georgia remains a steadfast U.S. ally in the region. The United States is working to bolster democratic and participatory governance in Georgia, foster institutions that uphold and enforce the rule of law, improve the quality and delivery of social services, promote integration with the NATO, increase regional cooperation, lay the groundwork for a sustainable resolution of conflicts with the separatist regions based on Georgia’s territorial integrity, and achieve sustainable economic growth.2 The U.S. government continues to support Georgia on its path to Euro-Atlantic integration and its efforts to reinstate territorial integrity and counter malign Russian influence. To advance the above-mentioned goals, the U.S. government assists all three branches of the Georgian government, civil society institutions, and the private sector to tackle the country’s political, socio-economic, and external challenges.

USAID is one of the leading donor agencies in the country. With approximately $1.8 billion spent in development assistance to Georgia to date, the Agency’s portfolio covers multiple sectors, including democracy and governance, social development, and economic growth. USAID’s Mission in Georgia has partnered with local and international development actors to strengthen and sustain Georgia’s democratic, free-market, and Western-oriented transformation. The Mission integrated gender equality and female empowerment into its 2013-2020 CDCS3 and the projects and activities covered by the strategy. Embarking on the design of a new CDCS for Georgia, the Mission seeks to advance Georgia’s journey to self-reliance through partnerships that bolster its capacity to plan, finance, and implement solutions to solve Georgia’s development challenges.4 In this context, women can play a paradigmatic role as agents of development, and the Mission plans to build on the lessons learned from the implementation of the previous CDCS to advance women’s engagement and participation in all sectors.

The Agency policy on gender equality and female empowerment has been guiding the Mission’s work on gender. While the Mission Gender Advisor provides overall guidance and participates in project and activity design activities, gender focal points in the technical offices coordinate gender integration efforts in the course of activity implementation. In addition, the Mission participates in and contributes to broader U.S. Embassy activities through the gender working group led by the Political and Economic Section. USAID also partakes in regular donor coordination meetings on gender equality, female empowerment, activities addressing violence against women (VAW) and gender-based violence (GBV), and nation-wide campaigning efforts.

2 U.S. Embassy in Georgia: https://ge.usembassy.gov/our-relationship/policy-history/embassy-fact-sheets/ 3 USAID, CDCS for Georgia 2013-2020: https://www.usaid.gov/georgia/cdcs 4 USAID, Georgia’s Journey to Self-Reliance: https://selfreliance.usaid.gov/country/georgia

Georgia Gender Analysis - 15 - USAID/Georgia

GEORGIA’S PROGRESS TOWARD GENDER EQUALITY

Population Data

Since 2008, Georgia’s population has been shrinking marginally with women representing slightly over 50 percent of the total. With it, Georgia’s youth population is decreasing in number and as a share of the total population.5 As of January 1, 2019, the total population of Georgia equaled 3,723,500, of which approximately 52 percent were women.6 In addition, Georgia’s population has been aging steadily since 2002 (Figure 1), with older age groups having more than twice as many women as men. Life expectancy rates are different for women and men in Georgia. The majority of women outlive men by nearly nine years.7 While women over 65 represent 16.5 percent of the total female population, men over 65 make up only 11 percent of the male population. This pattern is rooted in male migration as well as gender differences in life expectancy.8 Since gaining independence in 1991, the rate at which Georgia has been losing population is almost unmatched in the region. Low birth rates are generally seen as the main culprit, but of all factors responsible, international migration is argued to have the largest impact.9 These trends are likely to have negative consequences for Georgia’s economic development in the years to come. Figure 1: Population by Age. Numbers in 1,000s and Percentage Distribution

Source: Geostat, 2018

5 USAID, Youth Analysis for Election and Political Processes Project, 2018. 6 Geostat, Population and Demography, 2019. 7 ADB, Georgia Country Gender Assessment, 2018, 22. 8 World Bank, Georgia Country Gender Assessment, 2016, 8. 9 Hakkert, R., Population Dynamics in Georgia, National Statistics Office of Georgia/UNFPA, 2017, 9.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 16 - USAID/Georgia

Women’s life expectancy at birth has increased from 78 percent in the early nineties of the 20th century to 80 percent by 2017. Men’s life expectancy at birth has remained stable, fluctuating around 70 percent (Figure 2). According to the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), Georgia has achieved a significant drop in infant mortality rate (Figure 3), from over 30 deaths per 1000 live births for both girls and boys in 2004 down to about 10 by 2017.

Figure 2: Life Expectancy at Birth (years)

100

80

60

40

20

0

1990 2002 2005 2008 2011 2014 2017

Women Men Figure 3: Infant Mortality Rate (per 1,000 live births)

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

1990 2002 2005 2008 2011 2014 2017

Girls Boys

Source: Geostat, 2018

According to USAID’s Youth Analysis in 2017, Georgia’s 15-24 year old population shrank by 37 percent between 1990 and 2016. By 2023, it is projected to decrease by a further 24 percent to 10 percent of the overall population. To put this figure in perspective, the share of the 15-24 year old population of the overall total is projected to be 19 percent in less developed regions (excluding China), 16 percent globally, and 10 percent in Eastern Europe in 2023. These trends demand that Georgia invest in its youth to improve their ability to contribute to economic growth.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 17 - USAID/Georgia

On the whole, 57.4 percent of women and 64.6 percent of men over the age of 15 are married. However, this does not mean that women are less likely to be married providing that (a) 18.3 percent of women are widowed (as opposed to 3.4 percent of men) and (b) 4.3 percent of women are divorced (as opposed to 2.3 percent of men). Based on the percentage of married persons by age, men marry at a later age (25.9 yeas) than women (22.0 years).10

In light of Georgia’s strong rural-to-urban migration of youth, which leaves older people (mostly female) behind, one would expect a lower sex ratio11 in the countryside. But the opposite is true. According to the 2014 census, the overall sex ratio was much lower in urban (85.9 males per 100 females) than in rural locations (99.1 males per 100 females). Possible explanations include under-enumeration of women in rural areas and selective emigration of men from urban areas or women from rural areas, but the available data does not support these hypotheses. That said, large differences in urban and rural sex ratios are not uncommon in the region.12 Interestingly, there is a considerable gender difference in the distribution of young men and women in rural and urban areas. Sixty percent of youth (aged 15-29) live in urban areas and 40 percent—in rural areas; more female youth reside in urban areas and more male youth—in rural areas. Of all age categories, youth migrate the most, but female youth migrate twice as much as males, and they mainly migrate from rural areas to urban areas.13 For the group aged 15-29, the mean sex ratio stands at 97.3 males per 100 females in urban areas and at 118.1 males per 100 females in rural areas.14

There is a remarkable gap between the numbers of boys and girls born in Georgia, leading to a situation described as one of “missing girls” by the ADB.15 Between 2003 and 2013 the sex ratio was an average of 112 boys for every 100 girls. The gap has narrowed in recent years. According to the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) 2018 Human Development Report for Georgia, the sex ratio for 0-4 year olds is 108 boys for every 100 girls. This difference is more prevalent in rural areas, where the average sex ratio gap during 2005–2013 was 113.4, as compared to 109.5 in urban areas. The gap is also much higher in regions with a high proportion of ethnic Azerbaijanis or Armenians, but evidence indicates that sex selection also occurs in some primarily Georgian communities. The phenomenon is largely created by parental preference for sons, coupled with a desire for smaller families and the available technology to determine the sex of a child or terminate pregnancies. Early marriages continue to be a problem. They are more common in rural than in urban settlements, being more widespread among Muslims and least common in the capital city of Tbilisi. In 2014, UNFPA reported that in Kvemo Kartli (which is home to Georgia’s largest population of ethnic Azerbaijanis) 32 percent of married women among ethnic minorities were married before the age of 18, while 5 percent got married at the age of 13-14, and 16 percent at the age of 15-16.16

International Indices

Despite creating an enabling environment for gender equality, Georgia is yet to achieve transformative and lasting changes in gender relations and female empowerment. As far as the international gender- related indices are concerned, Georgia lags behind its neighbors in Eastern Europe17 and post-Soviet space in international gender-related indices, with low levels of women’s political and economic

10 Hakkert, op. cit, 29. 11 Defined as the number of males per 100 females. 12 Hakkert, op. cit, 38. 13 USAID, Youth Analysis for Election and Political Processes Project, 2018. 14 Hakkert, op cit, 41. 15 ADB, Georgia Country Gender Assessment, 2018, 28. 16 Hakkert, R., Sumbadze, N., Gender Analysis of the 2014 General Population Census Data, UNFPA/Geostat/Government of Sweden, 2017, 6. 17 Former socialist European states, such as Poland, Czech Republic and Slovakia (formerly Czechoslovakia), Slovenia and Croatia (formerly part of Yugoslavia), etc.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 18 - USAID/Georgia

participation and a disturbing incidence of VAW. One reason for this is a gap between policymaking and enforcement, which is discussed in the sections below. Georgia ranks as low as 139th of 193 countries in the Inter-Parliamentary Union’s (IPU) classification of Women in National Parliaments.18 Only 22 Members of Parliament (MPs) are women. Georgia scores far below (15.6) the world average (38.9) in Women’s Economic Opportunity Index of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE).19

Georgia has made some progress in the UNDP’s Gender Inequality Index (GII), dropping from a score of .426 in 1995 to .350 in 2017. GII considers health, education, and political and labor market participation rates.20 Compared to Azerbaijan, which has actually become slightly more unequal over time, Georgia’s progress is positive. However, Armenia has succeeded in moving from .471 in 1995 to .293 in 2015 (although dropping to .262 in 2017), indicating that Georgia’s progress toward gender equality is not as rapid as it could be (Figure 4). One reason for this is that Georgia is improving only in legislative reform (which slightly improves its score), and not in reform of actual practices or behavior.21

Figure 4: Gender Inequality Index by Country 2017

0.5 0.45

0.4 1)

- 0.35 0.3 0.25 Georgia 0.2 Armenia 0.15 GII Score Score GII (0 0.1 Azerbaijan 0.05 0 1995 2000 2005 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2017 Year

Source: USAID, Gender Analysis for Strengthening Electoral and Political Processes Project, 2018 (revised to add 2017 data).

The 2018 report of FAO on gender inequalities in rural Georgia also points to the gap between policies, legislation, and their implementation in spite of the progress the Georgian government has achieved in recent. According to the report, the enforcement and monitoring of these laws and policies remain a challenge.22

Another international measure of gender equality is the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) Global Gender Gap Index (Figure 5). The Index measures economic participation and opportunity, educational attainment, health and survival, and political empowerment.23 In 2006, Georgia had a score of .67 (1= perfect parity), ranking 54th out of 144 countries. By 2018, that number had risen to just .677, and Georgia’s ranking plummeted to 99th.

18 IPU, 2018, Women in National Parliaments: http://archive.ipu.org/wmn-e/classif.htm?month=6&year=2018 19 It measures specific attributes in the environment for women entrepreneurs in 113 countries: http://www.osce.org/gender/75553 20 See more at: http://hdr.undp.org/en/composite/GII 21 Margvelashvili, Kristine, Women’s Economic Empowerment in Georgia: Analysis of Existing Policies and Initiatives, UN Joint Programme for Gender Equality, 2017, 8. 22 FAO, Gender, Agriculture and Rural Development in Georgia, 2018, viii. 23 WEF, The Global Gender Gap Report, 2018, 4.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 19 - USAID/Georgia

Figure 5: World Economic Forum Global Gender Gap Index 2018. (1=perfect parity)

0.8 0.677 0.7

0.6 1) - 0.5 0.4 0.3

0.2 GGGI Score (0 0.1 0

Post-Soviet Countries & Turkey

Source: WEF, 2018. Turkey is included in the data set due to its proximity to Georgia and importance in the region.

Clearly, over the past 10 years, Georgia’s ranking in the Global Gender Gap Index has steadily deteriorated, putting it among the lowest five countries for gender equality within the Eastern Europe24 and Central Asia region (just above Tajikistan, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Hungary).25 According to the WEF’s 2018 Global Gender Gap Report, Georgia scores very well on 'Healthy life expectancy,' 'Enrollment in tertiary education,' 'Professional and technical workers,' 'Enrollment in secondary education,' 'Literacy rate,' 'Enrollment in primary education,’ and ‘Sex ratio at birth.' Georgia scores poorly on ‘Women in parliament,’ 'Women in ministerial positions,' and 'Years with female heads of state.'26 The UNDP and WEF gender indices illustrate that Georgia is in the bottom group of countries in the post-Soviet region in terms of gender equality.

The Women’s Civil Liberties Indicator of the Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) Institute27 shows whether women have the ability to make meaningful decisions in key areas of their lives. In 2017, Georgia’s score of 0.69 (on a 0-1 scale, the higher the better) is above the lower-middle income average but below the Eurasia average.

Georgia scores 79.38 points in the World Bank’s Women, Business and the Law index.28 The Index measures how laws affect women throughout their working lives. It outlines ways in which national laws can impede women’s work in the areas of accessing institutions, building credit, getting a job, going to court, protecting women from violence, providing incentives to work, and using property. With this ranking benchmarked against those of neighbors and post-Soviet states, Georgia is doing better than Armenia, Azerbaijan, Ukraine, Kyrgyz Republic, Turkey, and Moldova; but it still falls behind Tajikistan and the Baltic states.

24 Here, Eastern Europe refers to former socialist countries in Europe. 25 ADB, Georgia Country Gender Assessment, 2018, x. 26 WEF, op. cit, 105-106. 27 An independent research institute and the Headquarters of the project based at the Department of Political Science, University of Gothenburg, Sweden. The V-Dem project provides country-by-country multi-dimensional datasets on democracy distinguishing between five high-level principles of democracy: electoral, liberal, participatory, deliberative, and egalitarian: https://www.v-dem.net/en/ 28 World Bank, Women, Business and the Law, 2019, 9.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 20 - USAID/Georgia

Figure 6: SIGI Category for Georgia The Social Institutions and Gender was “medium” in 2014 Index (SIGI)29 of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) is a cross-country, composite measure of discrimination against women in social institutions (formal and informal laws, social norms, and practices) across 180 countries. It is an unweighted average of five sub-indices: discriminatory family code, restricted physical integrity, son bias, restricted resources and assets, and restricted civil liberties. Georgia’s SIGI improved from Source: OECD the medium level of gender discrimination in 2014 to the low level in 2019.30

International Obligations and Gender Equality Goals

Georgia is a signatory to many international human rights instruments, including the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW).31 In 1994, Georgia signed the CEDAW, Article 2 of which directly prohibits discrimination against women and obligates the member states to agree to pursue a policy of eliminating discrimination against women by all appropriate means and to undertake concrete steps to eliminate discriminatory laws, policies, and practices in the national legal framework. In 1995, Georgia became a signatory to the Beijing Platform for Action (BFPA), affirming its commitment to advancing women’s rights and gender equality.32 Throughout the late 1990s and early 2000s, the Georgian government made significant progress toward the implementation of the gender commitments laid out by the CEDAW and the BFPA. In particular, strides were made in responding to and preventing VAW, designing national legislation to guarantee women’s human rights, addressing issues of women in conflict, and preventing human trafficking.33 In addition, Georgia integrated the UN’s Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)34—including Goal 3 on promoting gender equality and empowering women—into its National Development Strategy.

In 2015, the Georgian government responded favorably to the introduction of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which replaced the MDGs. The SDGs address the global challenges related to poverty, inequality, climate, environmental degradation, prosperity, and peace and justice. The Georgian government showed a high level of support to the prioritization of all 17 of the SDGs, including SDG 5 on gender equality.

The 2014 Association Agreement between Georgia and the EU also requires Georgia to bring national legislation into conformity with international standards. The country has made a commitment to implement the EU acquis by improving legislation related to gender equality and anti-discrimination.35 In 2017, Georgia ratified the Istanbul Convention of the Council of Europe—the most comprehensive

29 See more at: https://www.genderindex.org/ 30 See more at: https://www.genderindex.org/wp-content/uploads/files/datasheets/2019/GE.pdf 31 An international treaty adopted in 1979 by the United Nations General Assembly. Described as an international bill of rights for women, it was instituted on 3 September 1981 and has been ratified by 189 states. 32 Geostat, Women and Men in Georgia, 2017, 5-7. 33 Ibid, 6-7. 34 See more at: http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/ 35 Association Agenda between the European Union (EU) and Georgia, 2014, 7-26: https://eeas.europa.eu/headquarters/headquarters-homepage/6913/association-agenda-between-georgia-and-eu_en

Georgia Gender Analysis - 21 - USAID/Georgia

international treaty on combating VAW and domestic violence (DV). The Convention entered into force on September 1, 2017.36

National Law, Policy, and Institutions on Gender Equality

In recent years, Georgia has made notable progress in creating an enabling environment for advancing equal and equitable gender relations (see Annex 1). The Constitution of Georgia guarantees equal rights to women and men. In 2010, Georgia took one of the most significant steps toward legal equality, adopting the Law of Georgia on Gender Equality. In 2016, amendments were made to include municipal governments.37 In 2014, the Parliament of Georgia adopted the Law of Georgia on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination and the first wave of legal amendments to align national legislation with the afore-mentioned Istanbul Convention,38 moving Georgia's anti-discrimination framework closer to international standards. Progress has been made in addressing DV and VAW across the country through legislative and executive actions. According to a 2018 study supported by USAID, UNDP, the Parliament of Georgia, and the Government of Sweden, one of the biggest gaps in the Gender Equality Law is that it is declarative, and it does not allow individual claimants to seek judicial protections to ensure meaningful implementation.39

In 2004, the Gender Equality Council (GEC), the focal point for gender equality issues, was established at the Parliament of Georgia under the Speaker of the Parliament following the adoption of the Gender Equality Law. The GEC is composed of 17 MPs, of which only three are men. The members are appointed every four years when a new parliament is elected. The GEC led the development of three- to four-year National Action Plans (NAP) for Ensuring Gender Equality and separate NAPs for Women, Peace, and Security (WPS) and the Measures to be Implemented for Combating VAW and DV and Protection of Victims/Survivors. It is playing a key coordinating role in advancing Georgia’s gender equality commitments included in the NAPs. The GEC Chairperson—who is also the First Deputy Chairperson of the Parliament—and the Assistant to the Prime Minister of Georgia on Human Rights and Gender Equality Issues at Administration of the Georgian government have been the vocal and instrumental champions of gender mainstreaming within Georgia’s legislature and executive respectively. In 2016, amendments were made to the Gender Equality Law, requiring all municipality councils (sakrebulos) to appoint a gender advisor and to create a local-level GEC; however, the extent of compliance by the councils is unclear.

In July 2017, the Inter-Agency Commission on Gender Equality, VAW and DV was established within the executive branch. The Assistant to the Prime Minister of Georgia on Human Rights and Gender Equality Issues chairs the Commission, which is responsible for the implementation of the United Nations Security Council Resolution (UN SCR) 1325 on WPS. Charged with inter-agency coordination, monitoring the implementation of laws within the executive, and the development of the above- mentioned NAPs, the new Inter-agency Commission complements the work of the GEC. The Public Defender's Office plays the crucial role of monitoring the full range of gender issues independently. In January 2019, the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Georgia (MOIA) made a decision to establish a department on human rights protection that works on issues related to GBV.

Despite these gains, Georgia continues to struggle when it comes to enforcing or implementing the adopted laws and policies through the executive, creating a disconnect between gender-related policy and practice. The improved enabling environment is unlikely to yield transformative changes so long as

36 See more at: https://www.coe.int/en/web/istanbul-convention/newsroom/-/asset_publisher/anlInZ5mw6yX/content/georgia-ratifies-the- istanbul-convention?inheritRedirect=false 37 International Republican Institute, Gender Assessment She Votes Georgia, Women’s Democracy Network (Fall 2017), 5. 38 Geostat, Women and Men in Georgia, 2017, 7. 39 Parliament of Georgia/UNDP/Government of Sweden/USAID, Gender Equality in Georgia: Barriers and Recommendations Vol. I, 2018, 24.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 22 - USAID/Georgia

the implementation mechanisms fail to keep apace. In 2017, the Mission’s Gender Analysis for the Economic Governance and Leadership Project pointed to the mismatch, which affects the status and gender roles of women and men in equal measure, puts the brakes on the gender-related policy initiatives, and stifles the reform process in general. A report by the FAO also notes a disconnect between policies and their enforcement in the agriculture and rural development sector.40 Legal mechanisms in place for the CEDAW lack implementation instruments, jeopardizing the rights and liberties of those at risk. The degree to which line ministries have been able to follow through the commitments of the NAPs for Ensuring Gender Equality and WPS has remained unclear, which led the Public Defender to conclude in its 2017 Report on the Implementation of the NAP on WPS in Georgia that “a large segment of the obligations outlined in the plan was not fulfilled” due to the “flawed nature of the document itself” and “negligence on behalf of the appropriate institutions.”41 Another report by the Public Defender of Georgia highlights a general practice of paying lip service to the notion of gender equality, making stated economic, agricultural, educational, social, and cultural policies irrelevant to the specific problems women face.42 A 2017 report on the implementation of Gender Equality Policy in Georgia found a number of issues related to the implementation of the 2014-2016 NAP on Ensuring Gender Equality. These include (i) insufficient human and financial resources required for the implementation of the plan, (ii) a lack of ownership by government agencies, (iii) a lack of gender points of contact/coordinators in government agencies, and (iv) poor coordination.43 The Draft Report on the Implementation of the EU Association Agreement with Georgia, released on July 13, 2018, calls on the Georgian government to increase women’s participation in politics and the labor market.44

According to the 2018 study supported by USAID, UNDP, the Parliament of Georgia, and the Government of Sweden, Georgia has not yet completed either a concept note or a specific policy mandating gender mainstreaming and gender-responsive budgeting in the policymaking process. The report argues that even a cursory read of several national action plans across sectors reveals a lack of gender mainstreaming. The report identifies gaps in Georgian law and related policy documents. Key issues to be considered for broader reform efforts that would have a significant impact on gender equality include, inter alia, broad changes to the electoral system toward proportional representation; equalizing the rights and protections provided to women employed in the private sector with women in the public sector regarding pregnancy, childbirth, childcare, maternity leave and compensation; and ensuring gender sensitivity in agricultural reform efforts.45 A 2017 report on sexual harassment by the Open Society Georgia Foundation also highlights the absence of prohibition of sexual harassment in the Georgian Labor Code, as well as the Administrative Offenses Code of Georgia.46

In 2016, Tatia Samkharadze, a journalist and an actress, brought sexual harassment charges against her former boss at Imedi TV—one of the largest media outlets in Georgia. In January 2018, Tbilisi City Court ruled in favor of Tatia, and in December 2018, an appeals court upheld the landmark decision considered as the country’s first court case of sexual harassment. In April 2019, the second instance court established in its final ruling that sexual harassment is a form of discrimination, ordering the defendant to pay the claimant compensation for non-pecuniary damages. The case and the ruling serve as encouragement to women experiencing harassment to come forward and report the perpetrators of all forms of harassment. In February 2019, a group of MPs drafted a bill, which makes sexual harassment a punishable offence. The Parliament of Georgia adopted the bill, outlawing sexual harassment and

40 FAO, Gender, Agriculture and Rural Development in Georgia, 2018. 41 Public Defender of Georgia, Implementation of the National Action Plan on Women, Peace and Security in Georgia Monitoring Results, 2017. 42 Public Defender of Georgia, Women’s Rights and Gender Equality, 2016. 43 Japaridze et al, Implementation of Gender Equality Policy in Georgia, 2016 Progress Report on National Acton Plan of 2014-2016 for the Implementation of Gender Equality Policy in Georgia, 2017, 34. 44 European Parliament, Draft Report on the implementation of the EU Association Agreement with Georgia, 2017, 7. 45 Parliament of Georgia/UNDP/Government of Sweden/USAID, Gender Equality in Georgia: Barriers and Recommendations Vol. 2, 2018, 22. 46 Pataraia, B., Sexual Harassment beyond Legal Regulation in Georgia, Open Society Georgia Foundation, 2017, 4.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 23 - USAID/Georgia

levelling fines against those found guilty of unsolicited ‘sexual behavior’.47 The Parliament also passed an amendment to the Law on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination, qualifying sexual harassment as a form of discrimination subject to specific sanctions.48

The Ministry of Defense of Georgia has an Advisor on Gender Equality that monitors its gender equality strategy, and in 2016 the Ministry of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) from the Occupied Territories, Accommodation and Refugees of Georgia developed a Gender Equality Strategy and Action Plan;49 however, the Ministry was dissolved and merged into three different line ministries in 2018.

Gender Stereotypes

Gender stereotypes about the roles and functions of women and men still prevail.50 They are an important factor in understanding Georgia’s sector-specific gender disparities and its relatively poor ranking in the afore-mentioned regional and international indices related to gender equality. The gaps highlighted in these indexes reflect a situation where women’s roles, opportunities, and rights are often constrained by rigid socio-cultural norms that are widely accepted in Georgia.

Gender stereotypes dictate that a woman’s place is in the house and a man’s is in the public sphere. In Georgia, women are highly educated, present in the workforce, well represented in self-employment, and active in civil society, but they are expected to undertake the majority of unpaid care work within the household, and there are few examples of men and women sharing care responsibilities.51 According to a UNDP survey, Georgians generally feel that men should be the sole breadwinner, while women should do the household chores.52 In a 2014 World Values Study, 55.8 percent of Georgians agreed with the statement that men make better political leaders than women. This is down from 68 percent in 2012, but still represents a significant portion of the population.53 Interestingly, when asked if elected men and women perform equally, the percentage of Georgian citizens who responded positively decreased from 56 percent in 2011 to 48 percent in 2013, while the percentage who said that elected men perform better than women increased from 21 percent to 38 percent.54 Furthermore, a 2016 poll revealed that 60 percent of Georgians agree that in Georgia, women are not brought up to be leaders.55

The gender analysis of Georgia’s 2014 General Population Census showed that for 92 percent of Georgian citizens, the most important role for a woman in life is taking care of her family.56 In a similar vein, more men (78 percent) than women (66 percent), participating in a 2017 survey, agreed that a woman’s most important role is to keep the home in order.57 Additionally, a 2018 report found that Georgian women dedicate 13 times more time to housework than men,58 and a 2014 survey revealed that 73 percent of Georgians think it is difficult or very difficult for women with jobs to combine household responsibilities with their job.59 The vast majority of girls (85-92 percent) are taught the so- called female jobs (cooking, cleaning the apartment, maintaining hygiene, doing laundry) during

47 See more at: https://oc-media.org/georgia-outlaws-sexual-harassment/ 48 See more at: http://georgiatoday.ge/news/14543/Definition-of-Sexual-Harassment-Reflected-in-Georgian-Legislation 49 Margvelashvili, Kristine, Women’s Economic Empowerment in Georgia: Analysis of Existing Policies and Initiatives, UN Joint Programme for Gender Equality (Tbilisi: 2017), 16. 50 USAID, Gender Analysis for the Economic Governance & Leadership Project, 2017. 51 ADB, Country Partnership Strategy: Georgia, 2014–2018. 52 UNDP, Public Perceptions on Gender Equality in Politics and Business, UNDP Georgia, Tbilisi, 2013. 53 World Values Survey 2010-2014, Georgia: http://www.worldvaluessurvey.org/WVSOnline.jsp 54 NDI, Public Attitudes in Georgia: Political Poll Results, 2011-2013. 55 NDI, Public Attitudes in Georgia: Political Poll Results, 2016. 56 Hakkert, R., Sumbadze, N., Gender Analysis of the 2014 General Population Census Data, UNFPA/Geostat/Government of Sweden, 2017, 5. 57 EU/Geostat/UN Women, National Study on Violence against Women, 2017, 11. 58 Parliament of Georgia/UNDP/Government of Sweden/USAID, Gender Equality in Georgia: Barriers and Recommendations Vol. 2, 2018, 32. 59 NDI, Public Attitudes in Georgia: Women’s Political Participation in Georgia, 2014.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 24 - USAID/Georgia

adolescence. The activities boys are encouraged to learn are maintaining personal hygiene, agricultural work, business activities, or cleaning the yard.60

In spite of the above challenges, the discourse on gender equality has been steadily gaining ground in both public and private sectors. What’s more, Georgian youth is showing promising signs of being able to drive the discourse and establish the groundwork for future progress. In addition to Tatia Samkharadze’s case described above, other examples include: Ms. Lika Torikashvili, a young Georgian student who addressed the Third Committee of the 73rd Session of the UN General Assembly as Georgia’s youth delegate in October 2018, championing the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development;61 Ms. Nino Zambakhidze, a young entrepreneur who attended the launch of the Women’s Global Development and Prosperity( W-GDP) Initiative at the White House in February 2019;62 or Mr. Vladimir Abkhazava, a young teacher from a rural public school who was named a top 10 for the Varkey Foundation Global Teacher Prize in February 2019.63 Still, to achieve a broader impact, Georgia will only find itself on course toward achieving gender equality goals when it closes the gap between policy development and policy implementation to let investments in gender-sensitive educational efforts start yielding long-term results.

Donor Coordination and Gender Mainstreaming

UN Women has been spearheading donor coordination efforts. The Gender Theme Group (GTG), organized and led by UN Women, includes all major donor agencies active in Georgia. Monthly meetings have already proven as an effective information exchange, learning, and coordination mechanism. The GTG puts together a shared annual work plan with specific targets. In addition, ad hoc meetings are called to discuss agency plans around public campaigns (e.g. Women’s History Month and the 16 Days of Activism Against Gender-Based Violence) or the visits of high-ranking foreign officials (such as the UN Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women). In 2017, the GTG and the Prime Minister’s Office have jointly set up a Task Force on Ending Violence against Women and Girls, which includes government and public entities, representatives of local and international organizations, bilateral and multilateral donors and UN agencies. In addition, the GTG has established a Task Force on Women’s Economic Empowerment for the agencies interested in and working on women’s economic empowerment.

The U.S. government agencies coordinate their activities on gender equality and female empowerment through a working group led by the Political & Economic Section. USAID’s implementing partners have worked with other international agencies successfully. One example is a pilot initiative, with support from the UNDP, National Democratic Institute (NDI), and USAID’s Good Governance Initiative, to help the GEC institutionalize gender impact assessment (GIA) as a set of indicators used to foresee how specific policies and laws may affect men and women, and how these policies can be used to promote gender equality.64 To date, GIAs have been applied to the Drug Policy Reform and Amendments to the Labor Code of Georgia.

60 UNFPA, Men and Gender Relations in Georgia, 2014, iv. 61 See more at:https://www.bennington.edu/news-and-features/torikashvili-selected-georgia-youth-delegate-united-nations 62 See more at:https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4778809/nino-zambakhidze-gdp-initiative-launch 63 See more at: https://www.finchannel.com/~finchannel/world/georgia/77035-georgian-teacher-makes-final-10-for-us-1-million-global-teacher- prize-2019 64 Parliament of Georgia, 2017: http://www.parliament.ge/en/parlamentarebi/deputy-chairmen/tamar-chugoshvili/news1/kanonmdeblobis- genderuli-gavlenis-shefaseba.page

Georgia Gender Analysis - 25 - USAID/Georgia

SECTOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

The analysis seeks to answer the following questions in the sectors of Democracy & Governance, Economic Growth and Opportunities, Social Development, and Cross-Cutting Issues:

- What are the main gender inequalities facing Georgia considering the five domains of analysis below?

o Laws, policies, regulations, and institutional practices that influence the context in which men and women act and make decisions; o Cultural norms and beliefs; o Gender roles, responsibilities, and time use; o Access to and control over assets and resources; and o Patterns of power and decision-making. Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance

Women in Government

Women make up more than half of Georgia’s population and 53.8 percent of voters.65 Yet, their political participation remains a challenge, especially in areas with ethnic minorities. Research on women’s political participation indicates that as the percentage of women in the national legislature increases, women are more likely to participate in politics.66 In this respect, Georgia does not score well. Figure 7 indicates that from 1992 to 2016, Georgia saw an increase in women’s representation in the Parliament of Georgia (up from 6.2 to 16 percent); however, the percentage slightly dropped by 2019. At the time of writing, the number of women in the Parliament of Georgia stood at 22 out of 150 (i.e. 14.7 percent),67 with the world average being 23.8 percent. According to the Inter-Parliamentary Union, Georgia ranks 139th in the world in terms of women’s representation in parliament.68 This means that Georgia scores near the bottom in the post-Soviet region. Still, the above-mentioned increase is a positive trend that is important in encouraging women across the country to become more engaged in politics at every level.

Figure 7: Women in the Parliament of Georgia

20.0 16.0 14.7 15.0 12.0 9.3 10.0 6.2 6.6 7.2 6.0

Percent 5.0 0.0 1992 1995 1999 2004 2008 2012 2016 2019

Year

Source: USAID, Gender Analysis for Strengthening Electoral and Political Processes Project, 2018 (adjusted to add 2019 data).

As the number of women in the Parliament of Georgia has increased slightly, the number of women in local councils has remained more or less the same. For a country where poverty affects women more

65 Dolidze, Nino, Women in Georgian Politics: Analysis of the 2016 Parliamentary Elections, Georgian Young Lawyers Association/USAID, 2016, 16. 66 Eckert, Stine; Nicole Gerring, Kyu-Nahm Jun, Matthew Lacouture, Sharon F Lean, Juan Liu, Amanda Walter, Strengthening Women’s Civic and Political Participation: A Synthesis of the Literature, USAID/Wayne State, 2017, 9. 67 Parliament of Georgia: http://parliament.ge/en/parlamentarebi/deputatebis-sia 68 IPU, Women in National Parliaments, 2019: http://archive.ipu.org/wmn-e/classif.htm?month=6&year=2018

Georgia Gender Analysis - 26 - USAID/Georgia

in rural and minority areas, this is of particular concern since local decision-making is driven by men’s priorities. At the local level (Map 1), there was a slight increase of women’s participation in local councils (sakrebulos), up from 11 percent following the 2014 local elections to 13 percent in the aftermath of the 2017 local elections. Of the 59 locally elected mayors, only one is a woman, and all nine governors are men. Between 1998 and 2017 (with six rounds of local elections held), the mean percentage of women’s participation in local councils stood at 12 percent, leaving room for comprehensive actions to reverse course as a result of the next elections. In a similar vein, Freedom House notes that while no laws prevent women or members of minority groups from participating in the political process, in practice, these groups are underrepresented at all levels of government.69

Map 1: Representation of Women in Georgia’s Local Government

Source: Created by USAID/Georgia’s GIS Specialist based on Georgia’s Central Election Commission.

Georgia also lags behind most of its neighbors in the Political Empowerment Measure of WEF’s Global Gender Gap Index (Figure 8). This ranking confirms that Georgian women have limited and unequal access to resources, face strict gender roles that limit their ability to participate in the public sphere and be decision makers, and spend a significantly higher amount of time on unpaid household and family

69 Freedom House, Freedom in the World, 2019.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 27 - USAID/Georgia

work. The legal system, while presenting no formal barriers to participation, does not facilitate equal political participation of men and women either.

Figure 8: World Economic Forum Global Gender Gap Index 2017: Political Empowerment Measure (1 = perfect parity)

0.3 0.25 0.227 0.2 0.15 0.093 0.1 0.05 0

Post-Soviet Countries & Turkey

Source: USAID, Gender Analysis for Strengthening Electoral and Political Processes Project, 2018. Turkey is included in the data set due to its proximity to Georgia and importance in the region.

The percentage of women ministers has been fluctuating in light of the reducing number of line ministries in the last 15 years (Figure 9). In 2017, there were only two female ministers in the government of 19 ministries (10.53 percent). 70 In 2018, the percentage point slightly improved to 13.3 only because the total number of ministries was reduced to 15, with the number of female ministers remaining the same. By 2019, the number of ministries was reduced further down to 11, with three of them being women (27.2 percent). Georgia sends few women abroad to represent their country in diplomatic missions. In 2016, 12 percent of Georgian Ambassadors (seven out of a total of 58) were women.71

Figure 9: Percent of Ministers that are Female

30.0 26.3 27.2 25.0 19.0 20.0 15.0 15.0 13.3 10.0

Percent 5.0 0.0 2004 (4/21) 2012 (5/19) 2013 (3/20) 2018 (2/15) 2019 (3/11) Year (Female Ministers/Total Ministers)

Source: USAID, Gender Analysis for Strengthening Electoral and Political Processes Project, 2018 (revised to add 2019 data).

70 Dolidze, Nino, Women in Georgian Politics: Analysis of the 2016 Parliamentary Elections, Georgian Young Lawyers Association/USAID, 2016, 14. 71 Geostat, Women and Men in Georgia, 2017, 80.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 28 - USAID/Georgia

On a positive note, Georgia elected its first female president as a result of the 2018 November presidential elections. Sixty percent of employees at the administration of the Georgian government and 57 percent of employees at the office of the Parliament of Georgia are women.72 In stark contrast to the executive and legislature, Georgia’s judiciary has achieved near total gender equality in its judicial branch, where 53 percent of judges (128 out of 238) are women (Figure10). The reviewed sources do not offer explanation of this near parity. In general, legal professions and careers are prestigious enough to attract both women and men in equal measure. One reason may be that the process for becoming a judge consists of a certification examination that is open and transparent. Discrimination based on sex is difficult if not impossible in this process.73

Figure 10: Percent of Women and Men in Georgia’s Legislature, Executive, and Judiciary

Judges

Local Councils

Governors

Mayors Women Men Deputy Ministers

Ministers

Parliament

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Source: USAID, Gender Analysis for Georgia’s Basic Education Project, 2018

Incentivizing Women’s Participation

In 2011, the Organic Law of Political Associations of Citizens was amended to provide 30 percent in additional funding from the state budget to parties that would include a minimum of 30 percent of women candidates on their proportional lists. This voluntary incentive came into effect in 2012, and it was applied to the 2012 and 2016 parliamentary elections and the 2014 and 2017 local elections. Analysis of the results from these elections indicates that the optional incentive did not significantly increase the representation of women in government. In the 2014 local elections, two political parties took advantage of the financial incentive, while five parties did so and in the 2016 parliamentary elections. In 2016, only one party—the Alliance of Patriots—obtained seats in the Parliament of Georgia designated to women through the incentive. Additionally, only one party—the Republican Party—instituted a voluntary internal quota of 30 percent to ensure women’s participation, with 34 percent of its parliamentary candidates being women.74

According to multiple reports, political parties in Georgia do very little to ensure women’s participation within their internal structures. They lack an institutionalized mechanism to recruit women. Some

72 Ibid, 8. 73 Ibid, 42. 74 Ibid, 21.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 29 - USAID/Georgia

parties have women’s wings, but none have an institutionalized women’s platform for the party.75 A 2016 report from the Georgian Young Lawyers Association (GYLA) highlights several weaknesses within the Georgian party system that contribute to the low political participation of women. Generally, the Georgian political parties lack stability, and many are established only for a short time to win an election. Women who work as district coordinators have a real interest in running for office, particularly at the local level, but the parties fail to take advantage of this opportunity. A 2017 study on barriers to political participation for women within the parties quotes women saying “there are quite a few smart and motivated young women in the regions and their resources are not being used by the parties.”76

The Georgian political parties are run by central political councils that decide political agendas. These councils tend to operate behind closed doors; they neither include many female members nor prioritize women’s issues. For example, Georgian Dream’s (the ruling party) political council consists of 15 members, of whom only two are female.77 For women, no matter the age, the best route to the Parliament of Georgia is via a political party. Of the 23 women elected to parliament in 2016, six were elected in majoritarian districts78 while 17 were elected on the proportional party list. The ratio of majoritarian-to-proportional for women at 6:17 is much smaller than the ratio for men at 67:60. In short, both voters and political party bosses are reluctant to show support for aspiring women politicians. Hence, for young women, the transition to a fully proportional system most certainly means a better chance for greater representation.79 To address the above challenge, the National Democratic Institute (NDI) has worked with three political parties (United National Movement, Georgian Dream, and the Republican party) to develop gender action plans based on the findings of audit reports completed in 2014. As a result, 3 parties developed gender action plans to address the findings of the reports.

In 2017, the Task Force on Women’s Political Participation, a coalition of local and international NGOs, developed a draft bill in support of 50 percent mandatory quota for parties’ proportional lists for parliamentary and local elections. In 2018, a number of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and activists demanded that the Parliament of Georgia pass a law on mandatory gender quotas in the national legislature and city councils; however, the bill did not receive sufficient MP votes.

Women in Civil Society and Media

According to the ADB, the recent advances in gender-responsive legislation, government mechanisms, and public awareness can largely be attributed to the advocacy efforts of Georgia’s civil society groups. 80 They use the media and other methods to campaign for issues, such as VAW, sexual harassment, and women’s political representation effectively. However, greater solidarity between organizations is lacking to lobby the Georgian government around a shared gender equality and women’s rights platform. In addition, most of them are concentrated in the capital city. Women’s organizations in Tbilisi, for example the Women’s Information Center (WIC), Women's Initiatives Supporting Group (WISG), Sapari, and others are active in advocating for women’s issues, but these organizations are constrained by a lack of funding. Resources at the local level are scarce and members of these groups are often not specialists in gender issues. 81 The Task Force on Women’s Political Participation began as

75 Ibid, 7. 76 Parliament of Georgia/UNDP/Government of Sweden/USAID, Gender Equality in Georgia: Barriers and Recommendations Vol. 2, 2018. 77 Morrison, Thea, Number of GD Political Council Members Reduced. Agenda.ge (1 May, 2018): http://georgiatoday.ge/news/10100/Number-of- GD-Political-Council-Members-Reduced 78 With the majoritarian election system, only one MP (either a party member or an independent candidate) is to be elected per constituency. With the proportional representation system, every political party presents a list of candidates, and voters can select MPs by voting for a political party list. 79 USAID, Gender Analysis for Strengthening Electoral and Political Processes Project, 2018, 29-30. 80 ADB, Country Partnership Strategy: Georgia, 2014–2018, 30. 81 USAID, Gender Analysis for Strengthening Electoral and Political Processes Project, 2018.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 30 - USAID/Georgia

a small group of women and women’s organizations that wanted to coordinate their efforts to advocate for women’s issues in the political sphere. It is made up of international organizations like the International Republican Institute IRI and NDI, as well as well-known groups (e.g. GYLA) and smaller NGOs. As noted above, the Task Force spearheaded the attempt to institute a mandatory quota for the Parliament of Georgia and local councils. It helped initiate the effort to collect signatures from the public in support of the quota. Despite coming short of passing the bill through the Parliament of Georgia, the Task Force’s efforts were a step in the right direction to galvanize public opinion and garner the MPs’ support for women’s increased participation.82

As illustrated above, the seeds of a national women’s movement are present, but they are currently most evident among young, urban women. There is an identified need for greater social mobilization that could reach beyond Tbilisi to other parts of Georgia, manifested both through local actions and national solidarity to ensure that the gender equality agenda continues to make progress. In this respect, the NGO sector of Georgia has not made much progress since 2010 when USAID’s Georgia Gender Assessment pointed to the lack of concerted efforts and coordination among women’s NGOs.83

In terms of the degree to which the local media covers gender issues, there is a lack of specialized TV programs or even much discussion on the topic of women in public life in Georgia. A study of major news media outlets in the lead-up to the 2017 local elections revealed that women did not make up even 10 percent of the coverage of political subjects during prime time news.84 Additionally, some news coverage perpetuated gender stereotypes (for example, pieces about education and healthcare mainly featured interviews with women, while stories about sports, transport, foreign policy and the military almost always included interviews with men), and political talk shows hosted only a few female guests.85

Violence Against Women (VAW), Gender-Based Violence (GBV)

DV and other types of VAW remain prevalent and society-wide problems in Georgia. VAW and attitudes about VAW are a critical impediment to progress on gender equality in Georgia. As long as popular attitudes are accepting, or even justifying, the practice of VAW, opportunities for women to play equal roles in society, the economy, and political life will be constrained. The 2017 National Study on VAW found that violence is a common experience in many women’s lives. Of those polled, one in seven women aged 15-64 reported having experienced physical, sexual and/or emotional violence by an intimate partner in their lifetime, and two percent reported sexual abuse by a an intimate partner. Ten percent of women experienced economic violence. One in five women reported having experienced at least one form of sexual harassment. It should be noted here that not all women are aware of all forms sexual harassment; hence, they do not always identify or report unwelcome and inappropriate sexual remarks or physical advances as such, describing them as forms of “friendly harassment” or compliments instead.86 The most common form of child abuse reported by women was physical abuse (six percent), followed by emotional abuse and neglect (five percent). The highest reported rates of intimate partner violence (IPV) are in Tbilisi and Samtskhe-Javakheti (Map 2). The lowest reported rates of IPV are in Guria and Ajara. Overall, reported rates of IPV were higher in urban areas than in rural areas87 despite the fact that rural areas and older generations tend to have more conservative and violence-condoning

82 Ibid, 31. 83 USAID, Georgia Gender Assessment, 2010, 17. 84 UNDP/CRRC, Gender Equality in TV Coverage of the 2017 Local Self-Government Elections in Georgia, UNDP/CRRC, 2017, 32. 85 Ibid, 4. 86 EU/Geostat/UN Women, National Study on Violence Against Women, 2017, 11. 87 Ibid, 7.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 31 - USAID/Georgia

attitudes than urban areas and young generations.88 Additionally, men tend to have more conservative gender attitudes than women.89

Map 2: Regional Comparison of Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) in Georgia

Source: Created by USAID/Georgia’s GIS Specialist based on UN Women 2017

Although 90.6 percent of Georgians say that it is never justifiable for a man to beat his wife,90 many Georgian women experience DV. In a 2017 poll, 81 percent of respondents said that DV was a problem.91 The data on the incidence of DV varies by region and survey, but all reports indicate that DV is underreported. However, there is evidence that public perceptions of DV are changing. In 2010, 78 percent of women thought that violence in the home should only be discussed within the family,92 whereas in 2017, 33 percent of women (and 27 percent of women who had experienced sexual or physical violence) agreed that violence between husband and wife was a private matter.93 On the other hand, in the same 2017 study, 50 percent of men and 42 percent of women agreed that “if a woman doesn’t physically fight back, you can’t really call it rape,”94 and 42 percent of men and 23 percent of women believed that a wife should obey her husband even if she disagrees with him.95 According to UNFPA, a majority of men (66 percent) state that they have shouted at their wife or partner at least once; 44 percent have used profanities to their wife at least once; 38 percent have at least once driven their wives or partners to tears with negative comments. In addition, 12-15 percent of the men surveyed by UNFPA in 2014 noted that they have pushed their wives or partners or slapped them in the face at least once.96

88 Ibid, 12. 89 Ibid, 17. 90 Institute for Comparative Survey Research, World Values Survey 2010-2014, Georgia, 496. 91 NDI, Public Attitudes in Georgia: Political Poll Results, 2017. 92 ADB, Country Partnership Strategy: Georgia, 2014-2018, Gender Analysis, 2018, 1. 93 EU/Geostat/UN Women, National Study on Violence against Women, 2017, 11. 94 Ibid, 12. 95 Ibid, 11. 96 UNFPA, Men and Gender Relations in Georgia, 2014, vi.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 32 - USAID/Georgia

According to the MOIA, 12 women died as a result of DV in 2017. NGOs reported that law enforcement officials and prosecutors in Tbilisi showed improved professionalism in handling DV crimes. The MOIA opened 2,248 cases of DV through December 2017; the Prosecutor’s Office initiated investigations in seven rape cases through September 2017. In cases that do not result in injury, penalties for conviction of DV include 80 to 150 hours of community service or imprisonment for up to one year. NGOs report instances of law enforcement officials failing to take action against perpetrators of rape and DV and failing to grant victim status to survivors. The Public Defender’s Office notes that low public awareness of DV, VAW, and women’s rights in general results in victims not seeking assistance from the authorities. Local NGOs and the Georgian government jointly operate a 24-hour hotline and shelters for abused women and their minor children, although space in the shelters is limited, and only four of the country’s 10 regions have adequate facilities. On a positive note, in January 2019, the MOIA announced the establishment of a department on human rights protection that will work on issues related to VAW and GBV.

Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Intersex Persons (LGBTI)

According to Women’s Initiative Supporting Group (WISG), the 2016-2017 Human Rights Action Plan of the Georgian government sets extremely few goals, objectives, and actions to improve the human rights situation of LGBTI individuals. Given that LGBTI persons constitute a particularly marginalized community in the country, the few issues that the Action Plan refers to cannot effectively tackle the systemic problems facing the LGBTI community.97 While all transgender persons are at risk of intimidation and physical abuse, transgender women98 and gay men99 seem to have suffered more from various forms of violence.100 In 2018, 23 gay men and four transgender women became the victims of hate crimes. Despite a degree of success achieved in recent years, especially with the adoption of the Law on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination in 2014, members of the LGBTI persons continue to face violence, oppression, and harassment from the general public, as well as specific institutions, including medical facilities and the workplace. Bias-motivated violence based on sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) frequently goes unreported and, hence, remains without proper investigation. Deep-rooted homo/bi/transphobia permeating virtually all segments of society prevents LGBTI persons from fully enjoying their rights and freedoms. A flawed understanding of democratic values and minority rights has also largely been inherited from the Soviet Union, and has been symptomatic of the nations with a collective memory of unresolved conflict and survivalist ideology, where LGBTI persons are seen as a threat to local customs and religion.101 The Public Defender’s Office reported that LGBTI individuals continued to experience systemic violence, oppression, abuse, intolerance, and discrimination in every sphere of life. According to NGOs, the Georgian government rarely enforced the law, and law enforcement authorities lacked robust training on hate crimes.102

Trafficking In Persons (TIP)

Georgia is a Tier 1 country in the U.S. Department of State’s 2018 Trafficking in Persons Report. This means that the Georgian government fully meets the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking.103 The report notes that, over the past five years, Georgia has been a source, transit, and

97 WISG, GYLA, EMC, Report on the monitoring of the implementation of human rights strategies and action plans for 2016-2017, 3. 98 Ibid, 20. 99 Equality Movement, National Report on the Violations of Human Rights of Gay Men, Other MSM and Trans People, in Particular Right to Health, in Georgia in 2018, 2019. 100 See more at: https://ecom.ngo/en/gruziya-soversheno-napadenie-na-transgendernuyu-zhenshhinu-v-tbilisi/ 101 See more at: https://ge.boell.org/en/2016/06/17/prejudice-equality-attitudes-knowledge-and-information-regarding-lgbt-community-and-their 102 U.S Department of State, Country Report on Human Rights Practices for 2017 in Georgia, 2018. 103 U.S Department of State, 2018 Trafficking in Persons Report.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 33 - USAID/Georgia

destination country for women and girls subjected to sex trafficking and men, women, and children subjected to forced labor. Traffickers recruit victims with false promises of well-paying jobs in tea processing plants, hospitals, salons, restaurants, and hotels. The majority of identified trafficking victims are young, foreign women seeking employment. Georgian men and women are subjected to forced labor within Georgia and in Turkey, United Arab Emirates, Egypt, Cyprus, and Iraq. Georgian, Romani, and Kurdish children are subjected to forced begging and coerced into criminality in Georgia. Georgia is also a transit country for women from Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan exploited in Turkey. Women from Azerbaijan and Central Asia are subjected to forced prostitution in the tourist areas of the Ajara region and larger cities like Tbilisi and Batumi in saunas, brothels, bars, strip clubs, casinos, and hotels. No information is available about the presence of human trafficking in the separatist regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia; however, the government and NGOs consider IDPs from these occupied territories particularly vulnerable to trafficking.104

Women, Peace, and Security

The importance of women’s participation in conflict resolution, peace building, and post-conflict reconstruction is undisputable. Despite some progress since the U.N. Security Council adopted Resolution 1325 on Women, Peace and Security in 2000 (UNSCR 1325), unanimously acknowledging the intrinsic role of women in global peace and security, much remains to be accomplished across the world, including Georgia. Fifteen years on since the adoption of UNSCR 1325, only seven to nine percent of women are involved in peace negotiations around the world. Georgia has adopted National Action Plans for the implementation of UNSCR 1325. Several projects funded by the U.S. government and other donors have advanced women’s participation in confidence and peace building in Georgia. Examples include the following projects:

 USAID’s Horizons Project that supports people-to-people and confidence building activities, linking youth, women, associations, and professional groups in Abkhazia with those living near the Administrative Boundary Line (ABL) and other areas of undisputed Georgia.  USAID’s Pankisi Eco-links Activity facilitates people-to-people interactions between Pankisi105 residents (e.g. youth, women, and entrepreneurs) and their peers in other parts of Georgia.  USAID’s Promoting Integration, Tolerance and Awareness Program (PITA) in Georgia advances interaction between ethnic and religious minorities and mainstream society.106  The U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL) supports the annual Women in Policing Conference that helps female law enforcement officers develop their leadership and professional skills.107  UNDP’s Confidence Building Early Response Mechanism (COBERM), funded by the EU, supports confidence building measures within and across conflict divided communities.108 Despite these efforts, there is untapped potential for women’s increased engagement in peacebuilding efforts across the country.

104 Ibid. 105 The Pankisi Gorge in northeastern Georgia is home to a small Muslim population called Kists (5,700 people according to Georgia’s 2014 census: http://geostat.ge/cms/site_images/_files/english/population/Census_release_ENG_2016.pdf). 106 See more at: https://www.usaid.gov/georgia 107 See more at: https://www.iom.int/news/empowering-inspiring-and-educating-women-police-georgia 108 See more at: http://www.ge.undp.org/content/georgia/en/home/projects/coberm.html

Georgia Gender Analysis - 34 - USAID/Georgia

Economic Growth and Opportunities

Poverty and Women

According to the World Bank’s 2016 Georgia Poverty Assessment, household income had risen by 8-10 percent in real terms in the preceding years, and the employment rate kept rising by 5 percent annually. However, the ADB argues that economic growth is unevenly spread, mainly occurring in urban areas, with 21.9 percent of the population still living in absolute poverty.109 Women comprise the bottom 40 percent of the income distribution, and female-headed households are overrepresented among the poor. Although the overall poverty levels dropped from 42.7 percent to around 20 percent between 2010 and 2015, they remain among the highest in the Eastern Europe and Central Asia region.110 Much of the poverty is concentrated in rural areas, where nearly half of the population of Georgia (43 percent) lives. Samtskhe-Javakheti is considered to be the poorest region of the country.111 The plight of women-headed households, marginalized social groups among the IDPs and conflict affected populations, and women from minority communities is further exacerbated due to their status.112

Figure 11: Poverty Headcount, 2010–14 Figure12: Poverty Headcount, by Gender of the Household Head

60 29 50 28

40 40

27 30 20 26 20 0 25 10 % population of 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 poverty(%) rate headcount povertyheadcount rate(%) 0 Living in female-headed household 2010 2011 2012 2013 Living in male-headed household 2014 Proportion in female-headed households Nationa Urba Rura l n l Source: World Bank. Estimates based on the data from Integrated Household Survey (IHS).

Women-headed households are common in Georgia; nearly 27 percent of the population live in female- headed households. Fifty percent of women heads of household are economically active. Persons living in households headed by women are more likely to be less well off than those living in households headed by men (Figure 12).

Labor Market and Migration

In the labor market, men are more successful in getting higher-paid and higher-ranking jobs. As women enter the labor market, they have to deal with horizontal113 and vertical114 segregation, the glass ceiling,

109 ADB, Georgia Country Gender Assessment, 2018, x. 110 Including Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Kyrgyz Republic, Moldova, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Poland, Romania, Russian Federation, Serbia, Tajikistan, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan: https://www.worldbank.org/en/region/eca 111 World Bank, Georgia: Recent Trends and Drivers of Poverty Reduction, 2016, 42. 112 See more at: http://eca.unwomen.org/en/where-we-are/georgia 113 Distribution of people across occupations and jobs.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 35 - USAID/Georgia

and the pay gap (see the sections below). The U.S Department of State notes highlights improvement in women’s access to the labor market; however, it notes that women are largely confined to low-skilled and low-salaried positions, regardless of their professional and academic qualifications. There was some evidence of discrimination in employment based on disability. There were also reports of informal discrimination against members of Romani and Azerbaijani Kurdish populations in the labor market.115

According to the International Labour Organization (ILO), in 2018, the Labour Force Participation Rate116 stood at 57.9 percent for women and 78.9 percent for men.117 This is largely in line with the World Bank’s data, based on which, about 61 percent of women aged 15-64 participate in the labor market compared to 79 percent of men. In 2017, Geostat (the National Statistics Office of Georgia) reported 58 percent of women and 75 percent of men as economically active.118 The highest level of economic activity among women is observed in the 45-54 year old age group (77 percent). The employment rate is the highest (69 percent) in the same age group, while being the lowest (26 percent) in the 15-24 age group. As for men in Georgia, the level of economic activity is the highest among men in the 25-34 age group (about 89 percent), while the employment rate is the highest among those in the 45-54 age group (76 percent). Similar to women, the highest unemployment rate among men is observed in the 15-24 year old age group (26 percent).

The World Bank’s 2016 Poverty Assessment notes that unlike men, women enter the labor market late and exit it early. The early exit can be explained by the different retirement ages for men and women, 65 and 60 respectively. Up to 50 percent of women aged 20-64 are unemployed for longer than a year (long-term unemployment). In families with children under 14, childcare responsibilities prevent women from making use of employment opportunities. Another study completed in 2018 explores employment and unemployment rates through the gender lens.119 It notes that the level of non-activity120 is as high as 42 percent among women and as low as 21.8 percent among men. The study also indicates that the unemployment rate in the 15-19 age group is the highest (31.9 percent).

The afore-mentioned factors have a bearing on the declining demographic trends, outmigration, and a low level of women’s participation in the labor market. The World Bank argues that Georgia would have an 11.3 percent gain in the economic output if the working-age women, who currently do not participate in the labor market, were to do so at the same rates as men.121

In 2017, USAID’s Youth Analysis for the Economic Governance and Leadership Project found that approximately 49,000 Georgian youth aged 15-24 were unemployed. This constitutes roughly 30 percent of the active youth labor force (those working or actively seeking jobs) and more than 10 percent of the overall youth population aged 15-24. The unemployment rate for Georgia’s 15-29 year olds (26 percent) is three times higher than that for those aged 30 and older (nine percent), with young males more likely to be unemployed than young females (Figure 13). In 2016, one in three (37 percent) of all unemployed workers in Georgia was between the ages of 15 and 29.

114 Low number of women in upper management and decision-making positions. 115 U.S Department of State, Country Report on Human Rights Practices for 2018 in Georgia, 2019. 116 The labour force participation rate is a measure of the proportion of a country’s working-age population that engages actively in the labor market, either by working or looking for work; it provides an indication of the size of the supply of labor available to engage in the production of goods and services, relative to the population at working age: https://www.ilo.org/global/statistics-and-databases/research-and- databases/kilm/WCMS_422090/lang--en/index.htm 117 See more at: https://www.ilo.org/gateway/faces/home/statistics?_adf.ctrl-state=12xfp3ejqn_4&locale=EN&countryCode=GEO# 118 Geostat, Women and Men in Georgia, 2018, 49. 119 Abesadze and Paresashvili, Gender Aspects of Youth Employment in Georgia, Ecoforum, 2018. 120 The non-active category of the population includes those who do not look for employment. 121 World Bank, Georgia Country Gender Assessment, 2016, 24.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 36 - USAID/Georgia

Figure 13: Georgia’s Unemployment Rates by Age

Source: USAID, Brent Edelman’s calculations based on Geostat (2017).

USAID’s 2010 Georgia Gender Assessment found that approximately 56 percent of all labor migrants leaving Georgia were women. They would leave the country in search of unofficial work as housekeepers or caretakers for the elderly, primarily in Europe. Circumstantial evidence suggests that the level of outmigration is still high to this day. While precise data about remittances is unavailable, it is thought that the proceeds sent home make up a significant, though unrecorded, contribution to the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and help to sustain many families. Labor migration also had negative effects such as lack of social protections and loss of family ties. According to data from the International Organization for Migration (IOM), 27 percent of female labor migrants left behind husbands, and 37 percent leave behind children. Most labor migrants originate from rural areas where job prospects, especially for women, are severely limited. A 2016 article in the International Journal of Innovation and Economic Development highlights trends in the “feminization” of migration.122 It argues that out of every 100 Georgian migrants 67 are women. The majority of Georgian women migrants are leaving for Greece (24.3 percent), Germany (23.5 percent), and United States and Russia (14.3 percent).

Discrimination in the Workplace

The Law of Georgia on Gender Equality and the Labor Code prohibit discrimination against women in employment. That said, significant gender disparities exist in access to and the conditions of employment in the country. Georgian law still does not fully protect women from gender-related discrimination. Women in Georgia have fewer opportunities to be promoted and earn lower salaries than men for similar jobs. In the Women’s Workplace Equality Index (WWEI)123 of the Council on Foreign Relations, an independent U.S.-based think tank, Georgia ranks 73rd in the list of 189 countries. It is doing better than Moldova, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Ukraine, but far worse than the Baltic states.

122 Kurashvili, G. Kinkladze, R. Women’s Migration Processes from Georgia, International Journal of Innovation and Economic Development, 2016. 123 The WWEI is based on the World Bank’s Women, Business and the Law 2018, which outlines seven ways in which national laws can impede women’s work: accessing institutions, building credit, getting a job, going to court, protecting women from violence, providing incentives to work and using property: https://www.cfr.org/interactive/legal-barriers/country-rankings

Georgia Gender Analysis - 37 - USAID/Georgia

Research has shown that many Georgian women are unaware of or unable to take advantage of their rights. Specifically, discrimination persists in the following areas: 124

Recruitment: Job adverts often invite only men or women, they might include requirements for women’s ages and physical attributes. The Labor Code does not include adequate provisions to protect employees from discrimination during recruitment and selection. Public and private entities lack rigid human resources (HR) policies and regulations that could safeguard against these practices.125

Sexual harassment: Many people think that the concept of sexual harassment refers to physical VAW and/or rape only. According to the World Bank’s Women, Business and Law 2019 Report, the 2010 Gender Equality Act defines sexual harassment and establishes that it is not allowed.126 In February 2019, a group of MPs drafted a bill which makes sexual harassment a punishable offence.127 In May 2019, the Parliament adopted the bill. In March 2019, the Parliament of Georgia passed an amendment to the Law on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination, qualifying sexual harassment as a form of discrimination subject to specific sanctions. The degree to which this change protects the victims of sexual harassment (or prevents it) is yet to be seen, as many prefer not to report perpetrators to avoid the stress and stigma associated with the process. For instance, the Public Defender’s Office reported receiving three sexual harassment complaints in 2016, and in none of these cases did the victims want to go to court. In addition, employers do not have incentives in the form of public pressure or pressure from enforcement bodies to comply with the law. The Georgian government initiated a sexual harassment training course for all civil servants to raise awareness of the problem.

Women with disabilities (WWD) and LGBTI persons: WWD and LGBTI persons face double discrimination. According to Freedom in the World 2019 Report by Freedom House, women and people with disabilities suffer, inter alia, from discrimination in employment. LGBTI people face societal discrimination and are occasionally the targets of violence.128 An informant of USAID’s 2012 report on WWD in the Europe and Eurasia Region pointed out that WWD in Georgia are often considered “creatures without gender,” forced to deal with a stigma that exacerbates economic challenges they face.129 Tax benefits for enterprises that employ People with Disabilities (PWD) were revoked in 2000, and specialized work places that hired PWD have been liquidated.130 Research and statistics on WWD’s access to employment is scarce, but circumstantial evidence suggests that WWDs, because of their status, are less likely to be employed than non-disabled women. Negative attitudes toward LGBTI persons are often the reason they are denied opportunities for employment.131

Horizontal and Vertical Segregation

A low number of women in upper management and decision-making positions—known as vertical segregation—is a particular concern in Georgia. A popular perception that “men make better business executives than women” props up the glass ceiling for women trying to move up the ladder to higher management positions. Other barriers include time conflicts because of family responsibilities; a lack of access to child care; and a lack of role models, women mentors, and mentors for women in senior positions. The World Bank claims that only 32 percent of firms with five or more employees in Georgia

124 USAID, Gender Analysis for the Economic Governance & Leadership Project, 2017. 125 U.S Department of State, Country Report on Human Rights Practices for 2017 in Georgia, 2018. 126 World Bank, Women, Business and Law 2019. 127 http://agenda.ge/en/news/2019/330 128 Freedom House, Freedom in the World, 2019. 129 USAID, Women with Disabilities in the Europe & Eurasia Region, 2012, 12. 130 Ibid, 18. 131 See more at: https://ge.boell.org/en/2016/02/25/europe-lets-speak-out-lgbti-rights-south-caucasus

Georgia Gender Analysis - 38 - USAID/Georgia

have women as top managers, and only 33.9 percent of firms count women in the ownership.132 Men own large businesses while women are more likely to own small businesses. Women are in the top manager position in only 19.7 percent of firms (with commercial banks, where women are well represented among senior officers, being an encouraging exception). The likelihood that a private enterprise will employ more women increases when there is female participation in ownership. In female-owned firms, 60 percent of full-time workers are women.

In terms of the distribution of people across occupations and jobs (i.e. horizontal segregation), many occupations are still considered traditionally “male” or “female.” Some professions, such as engineering, construction, energy, transport and communications, energy, and water supply are traditionally male- dominated. In general, men’s employment composition is more evenly distributed across different sectors and occupations.133 Women account for around 75 percent of employees in the health care and social sectors, 60 percent of people working in the hospitality sector, and 84 percent of school teachers. The majority of women are employed in jobs with a caring or service dimension134. Many women also work in the informal sector and in unpaid subsistence farm work. These gaps imply underutilization of the available human capital and misallocation of entrepreneurial talent.

Pay Gap

As noted above, Georgian law prohibits employment discrimination, but the modus operandi of Georgian public and private entities falls short of compliance. According to Geostat, in 2017, the average monthly nominal salary equaled 770 GEL for women and 1,197 GEL135 for men.136 The World Bank’s 2016 Gender Assessment corroborates this finding by putting the disparity at 37 percent (down from 46 percent in 2008).137 Despite the gap having shrunk in the last decade, Georgia still ranked 94th of 144 countries in the 2017 Global Gender Gap Index, placing it below the global average.138

The pay gap is higher than the overall average in the health and social work sector (Figure 14). Even in fields where women dominate, their monthly wages are lower than those of men (e.g. women’s average monthly salary in the education sector was 80 percent of that of men’s). In 2016, the gender pay gap was 23 percent in agriculture, 35 percent in manufacturing, 13 percent in public administration and real estate, and 42 percent in financial services.139

The majority of the gap remains unexplained by observable characteristics, and it is arguably attributed to discrimination in the labor market, vertical and horizontal segregation,140 and the fact that Georgian law does not recognize explicitly the principle of equal work for equal value. Overall, public administration jobs are more supportive of equal salaries for women and men with the same qualifications and capacities.

132 World Bank, World Bank, Enterprise Surveys, Georgia, 2013. 133 World Bank, Occupational Segregation and Declining Wage Gap, The Case of Georgia, 2015, 4. 134 ADB, Georgia Country Gender Assessment, 2018, xiii. 135 Approximately USD 285 and USD 443 respectively, using the monthly average exchange rate of March 2019. 136 Geostat, Women and Men in Georgia, 2018, 60. 137 World Bank, Georgia Country Gender Assessment, 2016, 28. 138 World Economic Forum, The Global Gender Gap Report, 2017, 11. 139 Indevelop AB, Gender Analysis of the EU AA/DCFTAS with Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine, 2016, 10. 140 Also known as occupational segregation.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 39 - USAID/Georgia

Figure 14: Pay Gap in Georgia

60

50

40

Overall Pay Gap

30 Pay Gap in Education

20 Pay Pay Gap Pay Gap in Health and 10 Social Work 0 1999 2002 2006 2008 2010 2014 2015 2016 Year

Source: Geostat, 2017

Family Obligations

Women that are active in the labor market are statistically far more likely than men to be undertaking significant domestic labor on top of paid employment.141 Women’s share of family and social obligations hinders them from advancing in their careers. Social pressures on women to comply with prevailing socio-cultural norms are particularly acute outside of large urban centers where household and unpaid labor is more time-consuming, traditional power imbalances are more severe, and social support systems for women are scarcer. This is important since childcare responsibilities are generally associated with reduced female labor force participation. In Georgia, this barrier is large enough to swamp the positive impact of education on women’s labor outcomes. Interestingly, USAID’s 2010 Georgia Gender Assessment concluded that cases of discrimination against women in the hiring process (specifically, against women with children, single mothers, and pregnant women) and unlawful termination after maternity leave were well documented, but the evidentiary burden of proving discrimination was very high under current labor law making it difficult for women to protect their rights.142 There is no indication that the situation has changed since then.

On a positive note, in 2013, maternity leave for pregnancy, childbirth, and childcare was raised from 477 to 730 calendar days, and paid maternity leave was raised from 126 to 183 calendar days. Also, the paid leave benefit was increased from GEL 600 to GEL 1,000.143 Still, while the generous maternity leave allows mothers to take care of newborns, the law reinforces traditional gender roles because it does not make provision for paternal or parental leave.144 In 2018, Georgia prohibited the dismissal of pregnant workers.145 While it is too early to assess the extent to which this requirement is met, one unintended result could be the reluctance of local employers (especially in the private sector) to hire women who are planning to have children or to hire them on long-term contracts.

141 Oxfam International, Gender Equality: It’s Your Business, 2010. 142 USAID, Georgia Gender Assessment, 2010, 19. 143 Approximately USD 222 and USD 370 respectively, using the monthly average exchange rate of March 2019. 144 E.g. The Nordic countries, which have generous paid leave systems, have shifted from maternity to parental leave systems with the goal of involving fathers in childcare and household work. 145 World Bank: Women, Business and the Law 2019, 18.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 40 - USAID/Georgia

Loans and Credit

Women, particularly those in rural areas, are likely to face difficulties in obtaining loans from banks for their business activities. Most Georgian banks require high levels of collateral for loans. Although there are no legal barriers to women’s right to own property, women often are constrained by a lack of own savings, a lack of property to use as collateral, and poor access to investment or working capital. According to USAID’s experience of working with women entrepreneurs (e.g. through the Supporting Youth Entrepreneurial Skills for Advancing Employability and Income Generation in Georgia project), the reasons include limited business skills, rigid socio-cultural norms, and a lack of access to information about business opportunities, especially in rural areas. It is customary for men to be given preference in property inheritance, ownership, and administration; therefore, women face an additional burden in finding the collateral needed to obtain credit and business loans. This is despite the fact that a slightly larger number of women than men have bank accounts (the difference being 5 percent).146

Land and Agriculture

Georgia is an agricultural country and women are important participants of and contributors to agricultural development. Less than half of Georgia’s population lives in rural areas and more than half of the economically active population works in agriculture, a sector in which men and women have distinct and often unequal roles. Rural women rarely consider themselves farmers because most of the work performed by them is considered part of their family responsibilities. Poor infrastructure in the countryside, substandard housing, and limited access to transport and modern energy supplies increase women’s workload and time burden.147 According to official statistics, men head 70 percent of farms and women make up 30 percent of farmers/farm owners. Women farmers are even less likely to be running farms for commercial purposes. Women do however undertake a large share of farm work, such as managing crops and livestock, dairy production, and processing.148 Women's right to own land is protected by law, but due to tradition land ownership in the family usually passes to the eldest son. In case of divorce, land ownership stays with the husband's family.

Entrepreneurship and Business Climate

In the private sector, just as in the public arena, women’s share of leadership roles is limited. Social norms and traditional values hold them back, with many Georgians still thinking that men make better politicians and better business executives than women do. Despite the fact many studies describe women as more resilient, they are expected to undertake menial and unregulated work to support the family. Georgia scores far below (15.6) the world average (38.9) in Women’s Economic Opportunity Index of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE).149 Women are less likely to participate in firm/company ownership or management. In 2013, only 33.9 percent of firms in Georgia had female participation in ownership, with only 19.2 percent having majority female ownership, and 32 percent with a female top manager.150 In addition, women are less likely to establish businesses in sectors where larger, more profitable ventures predominate. Women’s businesses tend to focus on traditional, lower revenue sectors, such as handicrafts or petty trading that are more competitive and serve the local market only. Female entrepreneurs are often concentrated in industries that use less capital, only serve the local market, and where the average firm’s sales are smaller. About 22 percent of female entrepreneurs are in retail and wholesale trade and 14 percent in textiles and apparel. About

146 World Bank, The Global Findex Database, 2017, 126. 147 FAO, Gender, Agriculture and Rural Development in Georgia, 2018, 53. 148 USAID, Gender Analysis for the Economic Governance & Leadership Project, 2017, 5. 149 It measures specific attributes in the environment for women entrepreneurs in 113 countries: http://www.osce.org/gender/75553 150 World Bank, Enterprise Surveys, 2013.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 41 - USAID/Georgia

56.5 percent of employed Georgian women work in agriculture, compared with the regional average of 16 percent in Europe and Central Asia. In general, women are more likely to own micro-businesses and less likely to own large businesses. These imbalances are often caused by the rigid definitions of femininity and masculinity that shape gender roles.151 Gender-based obstacles compromise women’s ability to start and grow micro, small, and medium-sized enterprises. These obstacles include (i) a lack of appropriate skills, information, and familiarity with the business environment; (ii) low self-confidence; (iii) a lack of networks; (iv) risk-averse attitudes; and (v) inexperience in running a business.152 The 2014 Georgian Employers Association Report on “The Current State of Development of Women Entrepreneurship in Georgia” identified clear needs for capacity building among businesswomen,153 another factor that also helps to explain why women lag in entrepreneurship.

151 USAID, Gender Analysis for the Economic Governance & Leadership Project, 2017. 152 ADB, Country Partnership Strategy: Georgia, 2014–2018. Gender Analysis (Summary), 4. 153 Indevelop AB, Gender Analysis of the EU AA/DCFTAS with Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine, 2016, 33.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 42 - USAID/Georgia

Social Development

Health

Life expectancy rates are different for women and men in Georgia. The majority of women outlive men by nearly nine years.154 According to the World Health Organization (WHO), in 2014, life expectancy at birth in Georgia was 68.8 years for males and 77.3 years for females. 155 This was higher than the average for the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS)156 but lower than that for the European Region.157 Life expectancy at 65 in the country was 13.4 years for males and 16.9 years for females in 2014; the sharp drop from 2013 rates (15.2 years for males and 18.8 years for females) was likely due to the change in population size determined in the 2014 census. The factors responsible for men’s lower life expectancy rate include the following: (i) 57 percent of all males over the age of 15 are tobacco consumers compared with 6 percent of females, and (ii) drug and alcohol use is very common among men.

In 2014, Georgia’s age-standardized mortality rate from all causes was slightly lower than the average for the CIS (984.4 per 100,000), yet higher than the average for the European Region.158 Alarmingly, there is a wide gender gap for this indicator. In 2014, the mortality rate for males (1310.7 per 100 000) was almost twice the rate for females (734.8 per 100,000).159 More men are affected by a high incidence of tobacco smoking160 and a number of diseases including the disease of circulatory system and ischemic heart disease.161 In 2013, the estimated age-standardized prevalence of tobacco use in Georgia was 58.5 percent for males, which is one of the highest values in the European Region162 (where the average rate is 38.5 percent) and higher than the average for the CIS (51.8 percent). In contrast, only 5.8 percent of Georgian females are estimated to use tobacco—this is lower than the averages for both the European Region (20.7 percent) and the CIS (16.1 percent). Mortality rates from motor vehicle accidents among males are about 4 times higher than among females. In 2014, premature mortality from the four major non-communicable diseases (NCDs), i.e. cardiovascular diseases, cancer, diabetes mellitus and chronic respiratory diseases, was much higher for males (618.9 per 100,000) than for females (262.9 per 100,000). The 2014 National Reproductive Age Mortality Survey explored the leading causes of death of women of reproductive age in Georgia. According to the survey, NCDs were the dominant causes of death (69.6 percent), with cancer taking a major toll (45.2 percent), followed by injuries (18.6 percent).163 In 2014, premature mortality due to female breast cancer was responsible for 27 percent of all premature cancer deaths among females in Georgia.164

Since gaining independence, the overall health and life expectancy of mothers and children improved owing to modern methods of family planning, perinatal care and delivery, combined with parenting classes. As a result of concerted efforts supported by the Georgian government and donor agencies, Georgia managed to reduce its maternal mortality ratio (MMR) significantly. According to the Maternal Mortality Estimation Inter-Agency Group, in 2000, the MMR stood at 60 per 100,000 live births. By 2015, this was reduced to 36 per 100,000 and by 2016, down to 23 per 100,000 live births. In 2017, the

154 ADB, Georgia Country Gender Assessment, 2018, 22. 155 WHO, Georgia: Profile of Health and Well-Being, 2017, ix. 156 A regional intergovernmental organization of nine member and one associate member states (post-Soviet republics) formed following the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Georgia used to be a member state, but it withdrew its membership in the wake of the 2008 Russo- Georgian war. 157 The region includes 53 countries in Europe and post-Soviet space. 158 Ut supra. 159 WHO, op cit, 12 160 WHO, op cit, 10. 161 Ibid. 162 Ut supra. 163 Lomaia at al, Findings form the National Reproductive Age Mortality Survey, 2014. 164 WHO, op cit, 17.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 43 - USAID/Georgia

Georgian government developed the National Maternal and Newborn Health Strategy (2017–2030) and a three-year action plan (2017–2019) with the overall goal to eliminate preventable deaths of mothers and newborns or stillbirths by 2030.165

The human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) epidemic in the country is largely concentrated among men who have sex with men, people who inject drugs, and their female sexual partners. Heterosexual transmission is the main reported transmission mode, accounting for 50 percent of newly reported cases in 2015.166 In 2017, there were approximately 11,000 adults and children living with HIV in Georgia.167 By January 28, 2019, the Georgian Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) Center reported 7,453 HIV/AIDS cases.168 Although Georgia currently belongs to the HIV/AIDS low prevalence countries, the AIDS Center anticipates an increase in the incidence of HIV/AIDS in the near future.

Women account for around 75 percent of employees in the healthcare and social sectors.169 In 2017, 65 percent of medical doctors were women.170

Education171

In the education sector, there are no legal barriers to boys and girls’ access to education on equal terms. The Law of Georgia on General Education guarantees free general education for all public school students in Georgia. The Ministry of Education, Science, Culture, and Sport of Georgia (MES) strives to make the system student-centered. It has declared access to quality education as one of the country’s strategic priorities, and it has made commitments to ensure children’s access to quality education irrespective of their sex, special need, religious, ethnic, and social belonging. The national curriculum underscores the need for equity in achieving the required skills and capacities for boys and girls. Nevertheless, when it comes to conducting rigorous analyses to base education policy decisions on evidence, Georgia has a lot of ground to cover since gender equality is largely discussed in the context of sex-disaggregated data only. High enrollment rates for both boys and girls seem to be leading the policymakers to surmise that, by and large, the sector is faring well in securing equitable opportunities for both. In addition, the degree to which the recommendations of international organizations, NGOs, and donor agencies to mainstream gender into the education sector or integrate the principles of gender equality into the education sector policymaking remains unclear. Judging by the fact that these recommendations have been put forward and reiterated in multiple reports over the last decade, one would argue that they have not been followed through. For instance, a review of the findings and recommendations of USAID’s 2010 Gender Assessment for Georgia reveals that, nine years on, the country is still dealing with similar challenges in the education sector (e.g. early marriage and dropouts in ethnic minority areas, street children, and the low number of male teachers).172

The UNDP’s Human Development Report for Georgia indicates high primary (103 percent) and secondary (104 percent) gross enrolment ratios. Mean years of schooling are the same for males and females (12.8). At the tertiary level, the gross enrolment ratio drops to 52 percent.173 The factors explaining the sharp decline include: (i) affordability problems for students from lower- and middle- income families, (b) financial support for students focused on high achieving students rather than those

165 See more at: https://www.unicef.org/georgia/press-releases/maternal-newborn-health-and-reproductive-health-priorities-georgia 166 WHO, op cit, 8. 167 See more at: http://www.unaids.org/en/regionscountries/countries/georgia 168 See more at: https://aidscenter.ge/epidsituation_eng.html 169 ADB, Georgia Country Gender Assessment, 2018, 17. 170 Geostat, Men and Women, 2018, 26. 171 USAID, Gender Analysis for Georgia’s Basic Education Project, 2018. 172 Gender Assessment for Georgia, USAID, 2010, 22-23. 173 UNDP, Human Development Report for Georgia, 2018.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 44 - USAID/Georgia

in financial need (i.e. merit-based vs. need-based support), and (c) limited resources in the system preventing easy cross-subsidization within (public) universities.174 Girls are more likely than boys to enroll in tertiary education, representing about 54 percent of the students pursuing higher education. In terms of Inequality-Adjusted Education Index,175 the report ranked Georgia 79th (0.745) among 187 countries in 2013; although, by 2017, the score improved to 0.826.

Overall, female students outperform male peers in primary, secondary, and tertiary education, which can be attributed to both the enabling environment and the cultural propensity to give precedence to girls’ education in equal measure. However, girls’ educational attainments do not lead to better employment opportunities later on. Although there is a lack of longitudinal research on the inverse correlation between women’s educational achievements and their employment status, we know that as women enter the labor market, where cultural influences favor men’s leadership status, they have to deal with multiple gender-related barriers, such as horizontal and vertical segregation, the glass ceiling, childcare responsibilities and family obligations, and the pay gap (as explained in detail in the previous sections). All of these factors together serve to explain why more men are able to find higher-paid and higher-ranking jobs. One might also argue that this state of affairs could be a disincentive for boys to perform better at any level of the education system.

Some textbooks, the predominance of female teachers at primary and secondary levels, and some parents and teachers perpetuate the established gender stereotypes. Gender bias in textbooks is important because they occupy around 80 percent of classroom time. The gender-biases portrayed in Georgian textbooks, reported in some studies, follow trends that prevail worldwide, i.e. women are underrepresented, and women and men are shown in highly gender-stereotyped ways in the household, in the occupational division of labor, and in the actions, attitudes, and traits portrayed. Students are sometimes encouraged by teachers to pursue studies in traditionally male or female subjects.

Women constitute approximately 80 percent of primary- and secondary-school teachers. They also predominate among the teaching staff at the tertiary education level except at the rank of full professor (where two thirds are men). The lack of or low numbers of male teachers can lead girls and boys to believe that being a teacher is predominantly women’s work. As the experience in other country indicates, in a system where men are long entrenched in positions of authority and women implement their decisions, gender equality in the teaching profession remains a challenge.176 Some parents and teachers also transmit stereotypes and norms that influence students throughout their school years. Factors responsible include wider societal influences, prejudiced attitudes of teachers, and a lack of gender training for in- or pre-service teachers.

In 2017, the Public Defender of Georgia published a special report on violence against children in public and private schools.177 Representatives of the Public Defender paid visits to 109 general educational institutions countrywide, including 98 public schools, five private schools and six boarding schools. The results of the monitoring made it clear that Georgia still faces multiple challenges in the fulfillment of obligations assumed under international and national legislation in the area of prevention and elimination of violence against children in schools (although they are largely perceived as safe by pupils). The report argues that psychological and physical forms of violence are applied in educational institutions by pupils as well as by adults, especially by those teachers who are in close interaction with pupils. Shouting is the clear leader among various forms of violence as it was named as a form of common address on the part of adults by the majority of pupils. The report indicates that 78.8 percent of this form of violence is

174 World Bank, Technical Assistance to Support Reforms to the Higher Education Financing System in Georgia, 2018 175 The HDI education index adjusted for inequality in distribution of years of schooling based on data from household surveys. Calculated based on data on inequality in education and education index. With 1 being most educated and 0—least educated. 176 USAID, Gender-Sensitive Indicators for Use in Europe and Eurasia, 2016, 93. 177 Public Defender of Georgia, Violence Against Children in General Education Institutions, 2017.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 45 - USAID/Georgia

perpetrated by teachers. Furthermore, the monitoring revealed the prevalence of stereotyped and discriminatory behavior among pupils and teachers. Across the board, it has proven challenging to prevent violence, timely identify violent behavior, and put the interests of children affected by violence first. Consequently, the number of identified facts of violence in school is minimal, and it does not reflect the real magnitude of the problem. Students lack the awareness of rights and responsibilities, and they do not receive training on the nature or prevention of violence. Schools lack a coordinated policy on and mechanisms for prevention and response. A report on gender equality in Georgia recommends that “educational institutions should be held responsible for the harassment of students by employees of the institution, other students, and third parties legitimately on the school’s premises.” 178

Persistent gender stereotypes thwart efforts to address violence in schools. Cases of psychological and physical abuse of children by adults and peers at general educational institutions are observed frequently; bullying among pupils is a widespread form of interaction among minors (allegedly affecting boys more). Boys and girls raised in families affected by DV have to deal with additional pressure and stress as direct or indirect victims. Another consequence of the above influence is early marriage, which forces many girls to drop out of school. According to the MES, in 2016, 115 schoolchildren between the ages of 13 and 17 left school. In contrast, in 2015, 408 schoolchildren terminated their studies (Figure 15). Despite the decreasing numbers, there is still a general lack of inter-institutional coordination on cases of early marriages. State agencies and law enforcement authorities do not perceive the sexual assault, abandonment of studies, and parental neglect that follow early marriage as rights violations.

Figure 15: Data on Early Marriage

Dropout from school by juveniles for the 115 purpose of marriage 408

Registered marriage of underage 5 2016 individuals 611 2015 Underage parents at the moment of 1278 childbirth 1449

0 400 800 1200 1600

Source: Public Defender of Georgia, 2016

According to the 2014 census, 100,113 persons have a disability status which according to the country’s legislation falls into four categories: clearly, significantly, and moderately expressed disability, and children with disabilities. Women comprise from 45 percent to 49.6 percent in these groups and 40 percent of children with disabilities. Children with special needs still face significant barriers in school enrollment and attendance. School non-attendance of children aged 6-15 in the country is 0.7-1.4 percent, compared to roughly 50 percent among children with impairments.179 This is despite the fact that 171 out of 505 schools in mountainous areas and 155 out of 297 schools in Tbilisi have implemented inclusive education practices180. In addition, studies highlight relatively low enrolment rates and high rates of early dropouts among female students in the Azerbaijani and Kist minority communities,181 children living and working in the streets (including the Romani and Azerbaijani Kurd populations), and some rural populations in mountainous areas with lower economic backgrounds.

178 Parliament of Georgia/UNDP/Government of Sweden/USAID, Gender Equality in Georgia: Barriers and Recommendations Vol. I, 2018, 59. 179 Hakkert, R., Sumbadze, N., Gender Analysis of the 2014 General Population Census Data, UNFPA/Geostat/Government of Sweden, 2017, x. 180 Civic Development Institute, Inclusive Education Practices in Georgia, 2016, 10. 181 We could not find data on access to basic education for Georgia’s Muslim population in Ajara, but women and girls are likely to face similar barriers.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 46 - USAID/Georgia

In 2014, UN Women reported that, while general education was accessible to most minorities, Romani women and girls (in Tbilisi, Kutaisi, and Kobuleti) stood out as the most marginalized group, with only 44 percent attending primary school in grades 1-9 and less than 10 percent—in grades 10-12 (Figure 16).182 Azerbaijani and Kist girls come behind with approximately 80 percent of them in grades 1-9 and around 70 percent in grades 10-12. The chart also shows that access to education for minority girls beyond general education drops significantly after grade nine. Many Romani children do not attend school or attend irregularly for different reasons, one of them being that girls perform domestic duties instead.183 In many ethnic minority areas, general education is only available up to the ninth grade, and if students want to pursue further studies, thy need to travel to a regional school, which requires financial resources for transportation, food, and clothing. This limitation restricts the ability of girls to continue their education beyond the ninth grade, as some of their parents fear that by pursuing further studies, their daughters might decrease the chances of getting married. The MES has been implementing purpose-built projects (e.g. “Second Chance Education for disadvantaged children with behavior problems and out-of-school children in Georgia”) for a group of out-of-school children including Romani children; however, further research is needed to ascertain the size and needs and of this group.

Figure 16: Access to Education for Minority Women

Udi

Roma/Romani

Molokans

Meskhetian Turks

Dukhobors

Azerbaijanis

Armenians

General 1- General 1- Professional/colle Highe

Source: Source: UN Women, 2014

182 UN Women, Needs Assessment of Ethnic Minority Women, 2014, 34. 183 Ibid, 51.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 47 - USAID/Georgia

Cross-Cutting Findings

Men and Gender Relations

The distribution of household responsibilities is gendered in Georgia. A total of 86 percent of men and 72 percent of women are satisfied with the existing model of the distribution of household activities.184 At the household level, men are mostly involved in fixing household items, paying utility bills, and buying food, more so in rural areas. Men are much less involved in cleaning the apartment and cooking, and they are least likely to participate in cleaning their residence. The fathers’ involvement in the upbringing of 13-18 year old adolescents is even less, as raising a child is generally considered to be the women’s natural responsibility.

Men are featured rarely as the champions of gender equality. Even in the GEC, which is the leading and most successful formal entity working on gender mainstreaming, only three of the 17 of its members are men.185 In Georgia’s male-dominated policymaking environment, this reinforces the stereotype that Gender equality is a “women’s issue,” constraining efforts to engage men in the discourse. Another possible reason explaining male politicians’ lack of enthusiasm to advance women’s participation is their reluctance to be perceived as “weak” by their peers or constituencies. USAID’s 2018 Youth Analysis for Elections and Political Processes argues that advocacy efforts for a greater representation of women and youth should be aimed at party bosses (almost all of whom are men) who determine the composition and rankings on party lists before voters go to the polls. This echoes the findings of a study by Ipsos, according to which three in five men (61 percent) globally acknowledge that gender equality will not be achieved in their country unless they also take action to support women’s rights.186

Women in Minority Communities

In total, approximately 87 percent of Georgia’s population are ethnic Georgian, 6.3 percent are Azerbaijani, and 4.5 percent—Armenian.187 About 80 percent of the population are Georgian Orthodox Christian, 13 percent are Muslim, and 4 percent identify with the Armenian Apostolic Church.188 The Azerbaijani communities are concentrated in Georgia’s southeast and they are Muslim (mostly Shi’a); the Armenian communities are concentrated in the country’s south and they are Christian (Armenian Apostolic Church). Smaller populations of minorities include Romani, Kist (in the Pankisi Gorge), Ossetian, Avar, Russian Dukhobor, and ethnically Georgian Muslims (mostly Sunni Hanafi) in Ajara. Minorities in Georgia, and particularly female minorities, face many barriers to inclusion in society and political life. In these communities, the perception of the role of women in society as subordinate to men is often stronger than in the ethnic Georgian communities. People in minority areas are less likely to have positive associations of gender equality compared to ethnic Georgians.

Minority communities face language and cultural barriers that inhibit their ability to engage with the broader Georgian society and to participate in the country’s political and economic activities. Only 17 percent of Azerbaijani women and 26 percent of Azerbaijani men know Georgian. The numbers for Armenians are slightly higher, but they still make up less than half of the population: 46 percent of women and 47 percent of men can speak Georgian.189 These cultural and language barriers (e.g.

184 UNFPA, Men and Gender Relations in Georgia, 2014, iv. 185 See more at: http://www.parliament.ge/en/saparlamento-saqmianoba/komisiebi-da-sabchoebi-8/genderuli-tanasworobis-sabcho/sabchos- wevrebi1 186 Ipsos, Gender Equality Around the World, the Global Institute for Women’s Leadership at King’s College London, 2019. 187 Geostat, General Population Census, 2014, 7. 188 Caucasus Research Resource Centers, Caucasus Barometer, 2017. 189 Hakkert, R., Sumbadze, N., Gender Analysis of the 2014 General Population Census Data, UNFPA, 2017, 42.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 48 - USAID/Georgia

candidates who run in Tbilisi local council elections must speak Georgian)190 within minority communities lead to lower levels of integration and involvement with Georgian institutions. Minority women marry earlier, get fewer years of education, live in locations with poor infrastructure, and experience stricter traditional gender norms than ethnic Georgians. All of these factors, as well as general disinterest in politics and disbelief in meaningful change in these communities, add up to significant barriers to minority women’s participation in the country’s political and economic life. Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs)191

Around half of the IDPs are women and girls.192 Many live below the poverty line, lacking access to basic livelihood opportunities. Domestic Violence (DV) is a growing threat as tensions rise within IDP families, but female IDPs rarely report instances of VAW because of fear or stigma, and acceptance of violence as a social norm. Trauma inflicted by conflict and persistently poor social conditions are directly correlated with DV, with women and children most often the victims. This problem is exacerbated by a lack of proper protection mechanisms, crisis centers, and psychological rehabilitation services.193 Women’s participation is also low within the two official negotiation processes concerning the conflict, the Geneva International Discussions194 and the Incident Prevention and Response Mechanism.195

Thousands more people are also still affected by conflict in Georgia, especially for those who live near the Administrative Boundary Lines (ABLs) between Georgia and the breakaway regions. Free movement is restricted for the citizens of Georgia who live in villages adjacent to the ABLs. These women and men are required to go through military checkpoints at the ABLs when they wish to cross into Georgia for employment or other purposes. Evidence indicates they are also dealing with the daily stress of living close to the ABL patrolled by the Russian military, with high levels of addiction to drugs and alcohol among men and antidepressants among women. Female Youth and Early Marriage

More female youth reside in urban areas and more male youth reside in rural areas. While the gap between the sexes in urban areas is fairly small, the gap is significantly larger in rural areas. In urban areas, there are roughly 227 thousand males compared to 235 thousand females, but, in rural areas, there are 167 thousand males to 142 thousand females. Expressed in different terms, the sex ratio (i.e. the number of males per 100 females) for the group aged 15-29, the mean sex ratio stands at 97.3 males per 100 females in urban areas and at 118.1 males per 100 females in rural areas.196 The large difference between urban and rural youth for the two sexes indicates that sex selective migration is taking place.197

Youth migrate within Georgia considerably more than other age groups. Most migration takes place between 20-24 years of age and is done predominantly by females. During the 2014 Population Census, 1.6 million people reported having moved to a different municipality in the past five years. Of the total migrants within Georgia between 2010 and 2014 (most recent data), nearly half (49 percent) fall into the

190 Ibid, 9. 191 The IDP population includes approximately 290,000 people (see: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world- factbook/geos/print_gg.html), mostly ethnic Georgians, displaced in (a) the 1990s as a result of armed conflict in the breakaway territories of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, and (b) in 2008 by as a result of the military confrontation between Georgia and the Russian Federation. At present, the Russian Federation occupies both breakaway territories. 192 Georgian government, National Action National Action Plan for 2018-2020 on Women, Peace, and Security of Georgia, 3. 193 Public Defender’s Office of Georgia. Special Report on the Rights of Women and Children in Conflict-Affected Regions, 2018, 36. 194 See more at: https://osce.usmission.gov/on-the-geneva-international-discussions-2/ 195 See more at: https://www.osce.org/chairmanship/415025 196 Hakkert, op cit, 41. 197 USAID, Youth Analysis for Election and Political Processes Project, 2018.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 49 - USAID/Georgia

youth category (between the ages of 15 and 29). Within this age group, women aged 20-24 migrate most within the country. In fact, female youth migrate twice as much as male youth. In general, these youth travel to seek new opportunities for education and work.

Women marry much younger than men, especially those residing in rural areas. Approximately one- third of Georgian youth aged 15-29 are married. Of the one-third married, there are twice as many females (41 percent) compared to males (18 percent). This is because women get married at a younger age than men. The average age for females to marry is 22.9 years, and for males—27.5 years (a difference of nearly five years). There are also significant differences between urban and rural dwelling youth. Rural female youth marry earlier than their urban counterparts. By the age of 24, 64 percent of rural female youth are married, compared to just 44 percent of their urban peers. Uniquely, the larger gaps in marriage rates between the urban and rural areas do not exist for male youth. 198

Early marriage, defined as the marriage of a person or persons under the age of 18, is illegal in Georgia. That said, the law allows exceptions in the case of parental consent for people 16 years and older, and the courts can grant permission for marriage in “exceptional cases” such as pregnancy.199 Despite its illegality, Georgia has a very high rate of child marriage compared with its immediate neighbors (Figure 17). A startling 25 percent of married women aged 20-24 in the poorest 40 percent of the population were married before the age of 18.200 In general, early marriages are more common in rural (10.9 percent) than in urban (4.4 percent) settlements, being least common in the capital Tbilisi.

Figure 17: Early Marriage by Country

30 Total % of women 25 married before age 18 20 17.2 among married women 14.0 15 12.2 aged 20-24 9.9 10 7.2 Among poorest 40% of 5 population

Percent 0

Among richest 40% of population

Country

Source: USAID, Gender Analysis for Strengthening Electoral and Political Processes Project, 2018

Early marriages are more widespread among Muslims: 19.6 percent of Muslim girls under age 18 are married.201 In these communities, parents consider early marriage as a way of protecting young girls from potential abduction while others (i.e. bridegrooms and their parents) see it as a means to increase labor supply or reduce the need for caretaking in large families.202 In 2014, UNFPA reported that in Kvemo Kartli (which is home to Georgia’s largest population of ethnic Azerbaijanis that are Muslim) 32

198 USAID, Youth Analysis for Elections and Political Processes Project, 2018. 199 UNFPA, Georgia: Child Marriage, 2014, 2. 200 Hakkert, Ralph, Nana Sumbadze, Gender Analysis of the 2014 General Population Census Data, UNFPA/Geostat/Government of Sweden, 2017, 7. 201 Ibid, x. 202 UN Women, Needs Assessment of Ethnic Minority Women, 2014, 17.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 50 - USAID/Georgia

percent of married women among ethnic minorities were married before the age of 18, while five percent got married at the age of 13-14, and 16 percent at the age of 15-16.203 In contrast, the marital age among Christian Armenians, Ossetians, Udi, Dukhobor, and Molokan is higher.204

By invoking girls’ consent to early marriage and local customs, neither their parents nor the authorities take effective measures to protect and act in the best interests of the affected children. As of September 2017, the Public Defender’s Office was reviewing 22 instances of alleged early marriage and the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Georgia launched investigations into six cases. Reports of child marriages continued throughout 2017, although there were no official statistics. According to some reports, child marriages occurred more frequently among certain ethnic and religious groups;205 however, other reports206 claim that early marriage occurs across the country and should not be necessarily attributed to any ethnic, religious, or regional groups.207

203 Hakkert, R., Sumbadze, N., Gender Analysis of the 2014 General Population Census Data, UNFPA/Geostat/Government of Sweden, 2017, 6. 204 UN Women, Needs Assessment of Ethnic Minority Women, 2014, 17. 205 U.S Department of State, Country Report on Human Rights Practices for 2018 in Georgia. 206 See more at: https://www.unicef.org/georgia/press-releases/girls-early-marriage-are-often-left-limited-education-employment-prospects-and 207 See more at: https://www.unicef.org/georgia/press-releases/girls-early-marriage-are-often-left-limited-education-employment-prospects-and

Georgia Gender Analysis - 51 - USAID/Georgia

SUMMARY OF CONLUSIONS

This section offers a list of conclusions drawn from the findings of the analysis. They seek to answer the following question:

- What are the main gender inequalities facing Georgia considering the five domains of analysis below? o Laws, policies, regulations, and institutional practices that influence the context in which men and women act and make decisions; o Cultural norms and beliefs; o Gender roles, responsibilities, and time use; o Access to and control over assets and resources; and o Patterns of power and decision-making.

Laws, policies, regulations, and institutional practices & patterns of power and decision-making

 Georgia has made great strides in improving the enabling environment for gender equality and female empowerment. In 2010, the country adopted the Law on Gender Equality; in 2014, it passed the Law on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination; and in 2017, Georgia ratified the Istanbul Convention of the Council of Europe. The GEC spearheaded the process of developing and adopting national action plans on gender equality and women, peace, and security.  Gaps in the enforcement of the adopted gender policies and commitments limit the degree to which the country is able to turn gains in policymaking into transformative changes for women and girls.  Georgia scores very low on women’s political participation, especially at the local level. Few women are represented in the legislature and executive as decision-makers. In contrast, 53 percent of judges are women. Political parties do little to incentivize women’s participation in elections and political activities.  Gender disparities affect women entering the labor market, as they have to deal with the pay gap, horizontal and vertical segregation, the glass ceiling, and discrimination in the workplace (including discriminatory recruitment policies, harassment, and biases based on sex or sexual orientation). Although the pay gap has been decreasing, it remains as high as 37 percent. It is largely attributed to discrimination in the labor market and the fact that Georgian law does not recognize explicitly the principle of equal work for equal value. Consequently, women’s participation in the labor market is low—the Labour Force Participation Rate is at 57.9 percent for women and 78.9 percent for men.  Economic activity is the highest among women in the 45-54 year old age group (77 percent) and among men in the 25-34 age group (89 percent). For both women and men, the highest unemployment rate is observed in the 15-24 year old age group.

Cultural norms and beliefs

 Notwithstanding the growing discourse on gender equality in both public and private sectors, gender stereotypes about the roles of women and men still prevail in Georgian society.  Despite its illegality, Georgia has a high rate of child/early marriage in some rural and minority communities (with Kvemo Kartli having the highest incidence).  Ethnic and religious minorities (and particularly women in these communities); women and men with disabilities; internally displaced persons; lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex persons face dual discrimination due to their gender identity and status.  Sex selection occurs in rural and ethnic minority areas and some primarily Georgian communities. In 2018, the sex ratio for 0-4 year olds was 108 boys for every 100 girls in Georgia.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 52 - USAID/Georgia

 Across the country, violence is a common experience in many women’s lives. One in seven women aged 15-64 has experienced physical, sexual and/or emotional violence by an intimate partner; one in five women has experienced at least one form of sexual harassment. The highest reported rates of intimate partner violence are in Tbilisi and Samtskhe-Javakheti, the lowest—in Guria and Ajara.  Nearly all schools have a low number of male teachers. Gender stereotypes and prejudices affect students through textbooks, teachers, and parents. There is a lack of gender training for in- or pre- service teachers.  As the vast majority of girls (85-92 percent) are taught the so-called female jobs (i.e. cooking, cleaning the apartment, or doing laundry) during adolescence, boys are encouraged to focus on activities that are deemed more appropriate for men (e.g. business activities or agricultural work).

Gender roles, responsibilities, and time use

 Leadership roles of women are limited. Many Georgian citizens agree that women are not brought up to be leaders and that men make better politicians and better business executives.  Young girls and boys migrate (both within and outside of Georgia) more than other age categories, with most migration occurring between 20-24 years. Female youth migrate twice as much as males, and they mainly migrate from rural to urban areas. Of every 100 Georgian migrants 67 are women, most of whom leave for European countries. Between 1990 and 2016, Georgia’s 15-24 year old population shrank by 37 percent.  Studies indicate that women in the paid workforce are far more likely than men to face the double burden of undertaking significant domestic labor on top of paid employment. There are few examples of men and women sharing care responsibilities.  In general, persons living in households headed by women are more likely to be less well off than those living in households headed by men. Nearly 27 percent of Georgia’s population live in female- headed households, and 50 percent of women heads of household are economically active.  Solidarity between organizations is lacking to lobby the Georgian government around a shared gender equality and women’s rights platform. Civil society groups working on gender issues are active in Tbilisi, but there is a need for greater social mobilization in other parts of Georgia.

Access to and control over assets and resources

 Women in Georgia need support to succeed as entrepreneurs, breaking through the established gender stereotypes.  Research shows high primary and secondary education enrollment rates for girls and boys, but they drop at the tertiary level. Studies highlight relatively low enrolment rates and high rates of early dropouts among female students in the Azerbaijani and Kist minority communities.  Educational attainments of female students, outperforming their male peers at all levels, do not lead to better employment opportunities. Men are more likely to be successful in getting higher-paid and higher-ranking jobs, and women are less likely to participate in company ownership or management.  As a result of concerted government and donor efforts, Georgia has drastically reduced its maternal mortality ratio and infant mortality rate over the last decade.  The majority of women live to over 80 years old, outliving men by almost nine years. Men are more adversely affected by circulatory system and ischemic heart diseases, as well as tobacco and alcohol consumption. Non-communicable diseases are the leading causes of death of women of reproductive age in Georgia.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 53 - USAID/Georgia

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR GENDER INTEGRATION

This section offers a range of recommendations that seek to answer the following question:

- How can the CDCS address these inequalities to contribute to the development outcomes below?

o Reductions in gaps between males and females in access to/control over economic, political, and social resources; o Reductions in the prevalence of gender-based violence; and o Reductions in constraints that prevent women and girls from leading, participating fully in, and influencing decisions in their societies.

General Recommendations

Women make up more than half of Georgia’s aging and shrinking population. Georgia needs capacity building support to overcome the barriers to women and girls’ full and equitable participation to advance its journey to self-reliance. In addition to mandatory gender integration into the CDCS and the program cycle, the Mission should make intended efforts to identify specific opportunities (either under larger projects or as discrete activities) to effect change for women and girls. For instance, these could include initiatives developed in response to the Women’s Entrepreneurship and Economic Empowerment Act signed into law by President Trump on January 9, 2019 (see Annex 2); the Women’s Global Development and Prosperity (W-GDP) Initiative (Annex 3); partnerships with the private sector to develop innovative, locally-driven approaches or to link up with the global ones that have already proven effective; or capacity building support to the state institutions that are facing challenges in the implementation of adopted gender policies. It goes without saying that whatever the interventions, their design should consider the plight of disadvantaged women and who may be facing excessive discrimination due to their status or age.

The Mission should also continue building on the success and lessons learned from the past and ongoing interventions (e.g. the work on gender impact assessments, gender-related research, empowering women’s participation in the judiciary, discrimination in the workplace, and measures to reduce the incidence of domestic violence). As applicable, it should also plan more nuanced project or activity level analyses to explore further some of the issues identified herein.

Programmatic Recommendations

Outcome1: Reductions in gaps between males and females in access to/control over economic, political, and social resources

Capacity Commitment

 Gaps between policymaking and  Gender-sensitive policies: Support gender- implementation: Work with the Georgian sensitive policies that increase the number of government, the Parliament of Georgia, civil women parliamentarians (e.g. a quota system society, and donor agencies to close the or family-friendly policies that factor in identified gaps in the implementation of gender women’s childcare responsibilities), improve policies and action plans at different levels. gender-responsive budgeting practices, and  Women’s participation in local self- draw on gender impact assessments.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 54 - USAID/Georgia

governance: Provide capacity building  Line ministries: Encourage line ministries to assistance to the gender equality councils develop sector-specific action plans aimed at within local councils (i.e. sakrebulos), starting increasing women’s access to economic, with the definition of their mandate since the educational and other opportunities. law does not specify their roles and  Political parties: Work with political parties to responsibilities institutionalize women’s wings, include more  The private sector: Explore partnership women in party councils, develop outreach opportunities with the private sector to strategies targeting female voters, disaggregate advance women’s economic empowerment. party lists by sex, and develop rules for These could be similar to global initiatives such women’s promotion and career advancement. as the Goldman Sachs 10,000 Women  Equal pay for equal work: Explore Initiative or the Nike Foundation’s work on opportunities to address the persistent pay the Girl Effect. The potential of such public- gap, working with the Georgian government to private partnerships to benefit women is great eradicate this disparity (which runs counter to but remains underutilized. Georgia’s international commitments, including  Civil society: Strengthen civil society actors to those made under the EU Association increase women’s political and economic Agreement), the private sector to address the participation; encourage women’s issue in their recruitment and employment organizations to coalesce around shared goals; policies, and research institutions to explore work strategically within the political system; the impact on those suffering from double and lobby the national and local authorities for discrimination. gender-sensitive policies, regulations, and  Media and public awareness: Work with news decisions that are followed through. outlets to eliminate gender discriminatory  Participation of women from minorities: approaches, support educational campaigns Work with local institutions to ensure that focus on women’s rights and women’s minority women have access to information political and economic participation, and about political and economic participation, promote business paths for women engaging youth and educating communities entrepreneurs and high-profile business about opportunities to get involved in non- leaders to encourage women’s involvement in traditional sectors. non-traditional sectors. Outcome 2: Reductions in the prevalence of gender-based violence (GBV)

Capacity Commitment

 State actors: Continue building the capacity of  Discrimination in the workplace: Work with the State Fund for Protection and Assistance the Georgian government and other of Victims of Human Trafficking and other development actors to increase protection for state actors to implement effectively the women’s rights to equality in the workplace, National Action Plans for Combating Violence focusing on pre-employment relations, equal against Women and Domestic Violence. pay for equal work, right to leave for family  Social workers: Enhance the capacity of social members with childcare responsibilities, and workers who are at the forefront of action against sexual harassment at workplace. preventing GBV and working with the victims  Coordination: Continue close coordination of GBV. with other donor (UN Women, Heinrich Boell  Violence and harassment in schools: Assist the Foundation, etc.) and U.S. agencies (e.g. government entities and school Bureau of International Narcotics and Law administrations to build effective Enforcement Affairs and the Department of communication channels addressing the cases Justice) working on GBV issues. of violence and harassment.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 55 - USAID/Georgia

Outcome 3: Reductions in constraints that prevent women and girls from leading, participating fully in, and influencing decisions in their societies

Capacity Commitment

 Women’s soft skills: Support training efforts  Labor market: Support institutional policies that bolster women’s leadership, self-esteem, and practices that that increase women’s labor self-efficacy, and confidence to pursue political force participation. careers (building on training in hard political  Gender disparities and stereotypes in skills). education: Work with state and non-state  Women’s entrepreneurship skills: Provide actors to ensure equitable access to education training to women-owned businesses to share for minorities and high-need schools; address know-how and developments in local and gender stereotypes in textbooks; and provide international business trends, explore formal gender training for civil servants, pre- and in- and informal education means to link up service teachers, and parents. These activities female students with potential employers, and should be combined with civic education assist women’s business associations with efforts. transition from start-ups to scaled-up  Female role models and male champions: businesses. Engage women leaders and male champions of  Youth: Support young boys and girls, who are gender equality in advocacy efforts aimed at a particularly susceptible to unemployment, to wider participation of women in decision- address the age-specific challenges. making and policy development.

Organizational Recommendations

 Encourage the Contracting Officer’s Representatives (CORs) and Agreement Officer’s Representatives (AORs) to undertake the Agency’s training courses on Gender Equality and Female Empowerment and GBV.  Carry out more nuanced, sector-specific gender analyses at the project and/or activity level.  Coordinate gender integration efforts in the technical offices via designated points of contact.  Uphold the practice of including the Mission’s Gender Advisor in project and/or activity design teams to ensure compliance with the Agency requirements for gender integration.  Continue engaging with donor agencies and other development actors.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 56 - USAID/Georgia

ANNEX 1: LIST OF KEY DECISIONS OF THE GOVERNMENT OF GEORGIA RELATED TO GENDER EQUALITY AND FEMALE EMPOWERMENT208

1994 Accession of the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) without reservations.

1995 Georgian Delegation took part in the IV World Conference on Women and the adoption of the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action (BPFA).

1998-2000 The actions considered under the national plan "for Improving Women’s Conditions" have been implemented.

1999 The State Commission on Elaboration of State Policy on the Advancement of Women. It consisted of 27 high-level members, including ministers, deputy ministers and representatives from local and international NGOs and the media. Under the auspices of this Commission, the President issued the policy documents that were strongly influenced by CEDAW and the Beijing Platform for Action.

1999 Decree N 511 about the Measures on Strengthening the Protection of Human Rights of Women in Georgia. Significant progress has been made by the Government of Georgia in ensuring a proactive implementation of the gender equality commitments laid out by CEDAW, BPFA, MDGs, International Conference on Population Development (ICPD) Programme of Action.

2000-2002 The actions considered under the national plan “to Combat Violence against Women” have been implemented.

2000-2004 The actions considered under the national plan “for Improving Women’s Conditions” have been implemented.

2002-2005 The actions considered under the “to Combat Trafficking” plan implemented.

2004 Gender Equality Advisory Council in the Parliament of Georgia established.

2004 The nationalization of Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) MDG 3–promotion of gender equality and empowerment of women, has been adjusted to the Georgian context through two key targets (i) ensuring gender equality in employment and (ii) ensuring equal access to activity in the political domain and at all levels of management.

Progress toward the implementation of the MDGs has been uneven and much remains to be achieved especially in the areas of women’s political and economic empowerment.

2005 Established the Governmental ad-hoc Commission for Gender Equality (GCGE).

2005-2006 The actions considered under the national plan “to Combat Trafficking in Human Beings” have been implemented.

2006 State Concept on Gender Equality adopted by the Parliament of Georgia.

2006 Law on Combating Trafficking adopted.

208 Geostat: National Statistics Office of Georgia, Women and Men in Georgia, 2018.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 57 - USAID/Georgia

2006 Law of Georgia on the Elimination of DV, Protection and Assistance to the Victims of DV adopted.

2007-2008 The actions considered under the national plan “to Combat Trafficking” have been implemented.

2008 The actions considered under the national plan “on the Measures to be implemented for Combating Domestic Violence and Protection of and Assistance to the Victims of Domestic Violence” have been implemented.

2007-2009 The actions considered under the national plan “for Implementation of the Gender Equality Policy in Georgia” have been implemented.

2009-2010 The actions considered under the national plan “on the Measures to be implemented for Combating Domestic Violence and Protection of and Assistance to the Victims of Domestic Violence (DV NAP)” have been implemented.

2010 Law of Georgia on Gender Equality adopted.

2011-2012 The actions considered under the national plan “on the Measures to be implemented for Combating Domestic Violence and Protection of and Assistance to the Victims of Domestic Violence (DV NAP)” have been implemented.

2012 Georgia criminalizing the offence of DV.

2012-2015 The actions considered under the national plan on UN SCR 1325 (adopted in December 2011) have been implemented.

2013 Appointed Prime Minister’s Assistant on Human Rights and Gender Equality Issues appointed.

2013 Gender Equality Department has been established as a standing unit in the structure of the Public Defender’s Office.

2013 Public Defender’s Office that has elaborated its Gender Equality action plan for 2013- 2015 as well as strategy for mainstreaming gender into the PDO’s work.

2013-2015 The actions considered under the national plan “on the Measures to be implemented for Combating Domestic Violence and Protection of and Assistance to the Victims of Domestic Violence” have been implemented.

2014 Non-discrimination Law adopted.

2014-2016 The actions considered under the national plan “on Gender Equality” have been implemented.

2014 Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence (Istanbul Convention).

2014 The first wave of legal amendments to harmonize national legislation with Istanbul Convention adopted.

2015 Ministry of Defense of Georgia adopts its internal Gender Equality Strategy, gender focal

Georgia Gender Analysis - 58 - USAID/Georgia

points appointed.

2015 The President of Georgia declared 2015 the Year of Women.

2016 National Action Plan for 2016-2017 on the Measures to be implemented for Combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence and Protection Victims/Survivors adopted.

2016 National Acton Plan for 2016-2017 for Implementation of the UN Security Council Resolutions on Women, Peace and Security adopted.

2017 The Council of Europe Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence ratified.

2017 The Inter-agency Commission on Gender Equality, Violence against Women and Domestic Violence Issues established and operational.

2018 Human Rights Department has been established as a standing unit in the structure of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Georgia.

2018 National Action Plan for 2018-2020 on the Human Rights adopted.

2018 National Action Plan for 2018-2020 on Women, Peace and Security (UN SCR 1325) adopted.

2018 National Action Plan for 2018-2020 on the Measures to be implemented for Combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence and Protection Victims/Survivors adopted.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 59 - USAID/Georgia

ANNEX 2: WOMEN’S ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND ECONOMIC EMPOWERMENT ACT

Women’s Entrepreneurship and Economic Empowerment Act Reps. Ed Royce (R-CA) and Lois Frankel (D-FL). Signed into law by President Trump on January 9, 2019.

Women around the world face barriers to reach their full economic potential, such as lack of access to education and health care, gender-based violence, discriminatory laws, and exclusion from the financial system. Research shows that achieving global gender equality in economic activity could add as much as $28 trillion to annual global GDP by 2025. The bipartisan Women’s Entrepreneurship and Economic Empowerment Act addresses gender-related barriers to economic growth and support women-led businesses by:

• Expanding support for women-owned businesses by requiring that 50 percent of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID)’s small- and medium-sized enterprise (SME) resources be targeted to reach enterprises owned, managed and controlled by women.

• Making it USAID policy to reduce gender disparities related to economic opportunity, strive to eliminate gender-based violence, support women’s property rights, improve access to education, and increase the capability of women and girls to determine their own future.

• Codifying USAID’s practice of shaping policy and activities through a gender analysis. This analysis would examine gender differences in access to resources and opportunities, different impacts of policies and programs on men and women, and provide recommendations to narrow gender gaps and improve the lives of women and girls.

• Mandating that USAID track and measure improvements in women’s economic empowerment, including employment, access to financial services, enterprise development, earnings and control over income, and property and land rights.

• Expanding the scope of development assistance from microenterprises to micro, small and medium- sized enterprises to reflect changes in the field.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 60 - USAID/Georgia

ANNEX 3: THE WOMEN’S GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT AND PROSPERITY (W- GDP) INITIATIVE

PROMOTING ECONOMIC EMPOWERMENT FOR WOMEN: The Trump Administration is launching a historic initiative to empower women globally to fulfill their economic potential.

On February 7, 2019, the Trump Administration launched the Women’s Global Development and Prosperity (W-GDP) Initiative, the first-ever whole-of-government approach focused on advancing women’s full and free participation in the global economy. Through the W-GDP Initiative, the Administration will seize on the significant opportunity that promoting women in the economy represents for boosting global gross domestic product. The aim is to reach 50 million women across the developing world from the start of the Trump Administration in 2017 to 2025. The President signed a National Security Presidential Memorandum and directed the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) to allocate an initial $50 million for the new W-GDP Fund. The W-GDP Initiative will have three pillars of focus: o Helping women to prosper in the workforce by improving women’s access to quality education and skills training; o Continuing efforts to fund and support women’s entrepreneurship and access to capital, markets, technical assistance, and mentorship; and o Working to identify and reduce the policy, legal, and regulatory barriers to women’s participation in the global economy and promote improved practices.

SUPPORTING OPPORTUNITIES TO ENSURE GLOBAL STABILITY: When women are empowered, they spur economic growth and help create stable societies.

Everyone benefits from the growth and stability that economically empowered women add to the global economy. When women are empowered economically, they invest in their families and communities, spurring economic growth and creating more stable societies. Research shows that promoting global women’s economic participation, especially in developing countries, could boost global economic growth by $12 trillion by 2025. Unfortunately, women in many countries face significant barriers to full and free participation in the global economy. Women are legally restricted from working in specific jobs in 104 countries, preventing more than 2.7 billion women from having the same job choices as men. Despite making up half of the world’s population, women only own one-third of formal businesses worldwide and have less—or no—access to financial services, markets, and property.

BUILDING ON OUR EFFORTS: Improving the role and ability of women to participate in the global economy is a critical issue and a high priority for President Donald J. Trump.

At the 2017 G20 Leaders’ Summit, President Trump and global partners announced the first-of-its-kind Women Entrepreneurs Finance Initiative (We-Fi). The initiative is on track to raise more than $1.6 billion in capital. On International Women’s Day 2018, the Trump Administration launched the WomenConnect Challenge, to increase women’s access to digital technology and bridge the gender divide. Through the Administration’s 2X Women’s Initiative, the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) is mobilizing $1 billion to support women in the developing world. President Trump has signed bipartisan legislation, including the Women, Peace, and Security Act; the BUILD Act; and the Women’s Entrepreneurship and Economic Empowerment Act.

W-GDP DELIVERABLES: The Trump Administration is excited to announce these new and expanded programs and partnerships as part of the W-GDP initiative.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 61 - USAID/Georgia

The W-GDP Fund: With an initial $50 million, this new fund at USAID will support innovative and effective programs that advance women’s economic empowerment, including: o The Incentive Fund: $20 million will be dedicated incentivize new programming in the field, including partnerships with government agencies and the private sector. o The Women’s Impact Livelihood Bond II: A partial guarantee of $100 million in loans to women entrepreneurs and businesses that support women in South and Southeast Asia. o The PepsiCo Partnership: A USAID and PepsiCo partnership in West Bengal, India, to scale women’s economic empowerment throughout PepsiCo’s agriculture supply chains. o The Engendering Utilities Partner Expansion: Expanding a program to increase participation and leadership of women in the energy sector to Malawi, Mozambique, Kosovo, El Salvador, Ghana, and Liberia.

The USAID-UPS Memorandum of Understanding to improve the ability of women entrepreneurs to export their goods to markets, with an initial focus in Africa, Asia, and Central America. The Department of State’s Office of Global Women’s Issues will launch WE RISE to work with microfinance civil society organizations to reduce barriers faced by women entrepreneurs. Overseas Private Investment Corporation initiatives: o Impact-First Development Fund: OPIC’s $50 million loan to Global Partnerships’ Impact First Fund will support organizations providing financial support to female borrowers. o Induced Bank Limited-Women Microentrepreneurs Facility: The OPIC $100 million loan will expand IndusInd’s microfinance lending to women in India.

Peace Corps commits to raising $1 million per year through 2025 from private donors supporting Community Economic Development, Agriculture, and Education projects.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 62 - USAID/Georgia

ANNEX 4: BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Abesadze and Paresashvili, Gender Aspects of Youth Employment in Georgia, Ecoforum, 2018. http://www.ecoforumjournal.ro/index.php/eco/article/view/774 2. ADB, Georgia Country Gender Assessment, 2018. https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/institutional-document/479186/georgia-country-gender-assessment.pdf 3. ADB, Country Partnership Strategy: Georgia, 2014–2018. Gender Analysis (Summary). https://www.adb.org/documents/georgia-country-partnership-strategy-2014-2018 https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/linked-documents/cps-geo-2014-2018-ga.pdf 4. Caucasus Research Resource Centers, “Caucasus Barometer,” 2017. http://caucasusbarometer.org/en/cb2017ge/RELGION/ 5. Civic Development Institute, Inclusive Education Practices in Georgia, 2016. http://cdi.org.ge/uploads/pages/alternative-report-on-the-implementation-of-crpd-education-280616-eng-45.pdf 6. Dolidze, N., Women in Georgian Politics: Analysis of the 2016 Parliamentary Elections, GYLA/USAID, 2016. https://gyla.ge/files/news/2008/Women%20in%20Georgian%20Politics.pdf 7. Eckert, et al, Strengthening Women’s Civic and Political Participation: A Synthesis of the Literature, USAID/Wayne State, 2017. https://www.iie.org/Research-and-Insights/Publications/DFG-WSU-Publication 8. Equality Movement, National Report on the Violations of Human Rights of Gay Men, Other MSM and Trans People, in Particular Right to Health, in Georgia in 2018, 2019. https://www.scribd.com/document/403330988/National-Report-on-the-Violation-of-Human-Rights-of-Gay-Men-Other-MSM-and-Trans- People-in-Particular-Right-to-Health-in-Georgia-in-2018#from_embed 9. EU/Geostat/UN Women, National Study on Violence against Women, 2017. http://georgia.unwomen.org/en/digital-library/publications/2018/03/national-study-on-violence-against-women-in-georgia-2017#view 10. European Parliament, Draft Report on the implementation of the EU Association Agreement with Georgia, 2018. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-8-2018-0320_EN.html 11. FAO, Gender, Agriculture and Rural Development in Georgia, 2018. http://www.fao.org/3/ca0577en/CA0577EN.pdf 12. Freedom House, Freedom in the World, 2019. https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/freedom-world-2019 13. Geostat, General Population Census, 2014. http://geostat.ge/cms/site_images/_files/english/population/Census_release_ENG_2016.pdf 14. Geostat, Women and Men in Georgia, 2017. http://www.geostat.ge/cms/site_images/_files/english/health/W&M%20in%20ENG_2017.pdf 15. Geostat, Women and Men in Georgia, 2018. http://www.geostat.ge/cms/site_images/_files/english/health/W&M%20ENG-2018.pdf 16. Government of Georgia, 2018-2020 National Action Plan of Georgia for Implementation of the UN Security Council Resolutions on Women, Peace and Security, 2018. http://georgia.unwomen.org/en/digital-library/publications/2018/09/2018-2020-national-action-plan-of-georgia 17. Geostat, Population and Demography, 2019. https://www.geostat.ge/en/modules/categories/316/population-and-demography 18. Government of Georgia, 2018-2020 National Action Plan on Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment, 2018. http://georgia.unwomen.org/en/news/stories/2018/04/government-of-georgia-approves-two-2018-2020-national-action-plans 19. Hakkert, R., Population Dynamics in Georgia, National Statistics Office of Georgia/UNFPA, 2017. https://georgia.unfpa.org/en/publications/population-dynamics-georgia-overview-based-2014-general-population-census-data 20. Hakkert, R., Sumbadze, N., Gender Analysis of the 2014 General Population Census Data, UNFPA/Geostat/Government of Sweden, 2017. https://georgia.unfpa.org/sites/default/files/pub-pdf/1.%20Gender_ENGLI_Print_F.pdf 21. Institute for Comparative Survey Research, World Values Survey, Results by Country, 2014. http://www.worldvaluessurvey.org/WVSDocumentationWV6.jsp 22. Ipsos, Gender Equality Around the World, the Global Institute for Women’s Leadership at King’s College London, 2019. https://www.ipsos.com/en-za/gender-equality-around-world 23. IRI, Gender Assessment She Votes Georgia, 2017.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 63 - USAID/Georgia

http://www.iri.org/sites/default/files/shevotes_georgia_2017.pdf 24. Japaridze E. et al., Implementation of Gender Policy in Georgia: 2016 Progress Report on National Action Plan of 2014–2016 for the Implementation of Gender Equality Policy in Georgia, 2017. http://www.parliament.ge/en/ajax/downloadFile/72000/Gender_Equality_NAP_report_2016_ENG_Edited_Final_July_2017 25. Kurashvili, G., Kinkladze, R., Women’s Migration Processes from Georgia, International Journal of Innovation and Economic Development, 2016. https://ideas.repec.org/a/mgs/ijoied/v2y2016i5p18-23.html 26. Lomaia at al, Findings form the National Reproductive Age Mortality Survey, 2014. https://www.dovepress.com/leading-causes-of-death-of-women-of-reproductive-age-in-the-republic-o-peer-reviewed-fulltext-article-IJWH 27. Margvelashvili, Kristine, Women’s Economic Empowerment in Georgia: Analysis of Existing Policies and Initiatives, UN Joint Programme for Gender Equality, 2017. http://www.parliament.ge/uploads/other/86/86669.pdf 28. National Center for Disease Control and Public Health of Georgia, Exploring Harmful Practices of Early/Child Marriage and FGM/C in Georgia, Final Report, 2017. https://www.unicef.org/georgia/topics/child-marriage 29. NDI, Public Attitudes in Georgia: Women’s Political Participation in Georgia, 2014. https://www.ndi.org/sites/default/files/NDI%20Georgia_October%202014_Gender%20poll_Public%20ENG_Final.pdf 30. NDI, Public Attitudes in Georgia: Political Poll Results, 2010-2018. https://www.ndi.org/georgia-polls 31. OSCE/ODIHR, Election Observation Mission Final Report, Georgia, 2018. https://www.osce.org/odihr/elections/georgia 32. Oxfam International, Gender Equality: It’s Your Business, 2010. https://www.oxfam.org/en/research/gender-equality-its-your-business 33. Parliament of Georgia/UNDP/Government of Sweden/USAID, Gender Equality in Georgia: Barriers and Recommendations Vol. I, 2018. http://www.ge.undp.org/content/georgia/en/home/library/democratic_governance/gender-equality-in-georgia.html 34. Pataraia, B., Sexual Harassment beyond Legal Regulation in Georgia, Open Society Georgia Foundation, 2017. http://www.osgf.ge/files/2018/Publications/Equality_ENG.pdf 35. Public Defender of Georgia, Implementation of the National Action Plan on Women, Peace and Security in Georgia Monitoring Results, 2017. www.ombudsman.ge 36. Public Defender’s Office of Georgia, Special Report on the Rights of Women and Children in Conflict- Affected Regions, 2018. www.ombudsman.ge 37. Public Defender of Georgia, Violence Against Children in General Education Institutions, 2017. http://www.ombudsman.ge 38. Public Defender of Georgia, Women’s Rights and Gender Equality, 2016. www.ombudsman.ge 39. Spear, et al, Gender Analysis of the EU AA/DCFTAS with Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine, Indevelop AB, 2016. https://www.sida.se/contentassets/1d7e165f86b349f7a4629d30ffdcde83/final-report---gender-analysis-of-eu-aadcfta-with-georgia-moldova- and-ukraine-29-jan-2016.pdf 40. UNDP, Human Development Indices and Indicators: Briefing Note for Countries on the 2018 Statistical Update, Georgia, 2018. http://hdr.undp.org/sites/all/themes/hdr_theme/country-notes/GEO.pdf 41. UNDP, Public Perceptions on Gender Equality in Politics and Business, UNDP Georgia, Tbilisi, 2013. http://www.ge.undp.org/content/georgia/en/home/library/democratic_governance/public-perceptions-on-gender-equality-in-politics-and- business.html 42. UNDP/CRRC, Gender Equality in TV Coverage of the 2017 Local Self-Government Elections in Georgia, 2017. http://www.ge.undp.org/content/dam/georgia/docs/publications/DG/UNDP_GE_DG_gender_media_monitoring_report_2017_eng.pdf

Georgia Gender Analysis - 64 - USAID/Georgia

43. UNFPA, Georgia: Child Marriage, 2014. https://eeca.unfpa.org/en/publications/child-marriage-georgia-summary 44. UNFPA, Men and Gender Relations in Georgia, 2014. https://eeca.unfpa.org/en/publications/men-and-gender-relations-georgia 45. UN Women, Needs Assessment of Ethnic Minority Women, 2014. http://ecmicaucasus.org/upload/Ethnic%20Minority%20Women_Eng.pdf 46. UN Women Georgia, Study on Needs and Priorities of IDPs and Conflict-Affected Women and Girls, 2014. http://georgia.unwomen.org/en/digital-library/publications/2014/01/needs-and-priorities-of-idp-and-conflict-affected 47. USAID, Automated Directives System, Chapter 201: Program Cycle Operational Policy, 2018. https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1870/201.pdf 48. USAID, Automated Directives System, Chapter 205: Integrating Gender Equality and Female Empowerment in USAID’s Program Cycle, 2017. https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1870/205.pdf 49. USAID, Gender Equality and Female Empowerment Policy, 2012. https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1865/GenderEqualityPolicy_0.pdf 50. USAID, Georgia Gender Assessment, 2010. http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/Pnads884.pdf 51. USAID, Gender Analysis for the Economic Governance & Leadership Project, 2017. 52. USAID, Gender Analysis for Strengthening Electoral and Political Processes Project, 2018. 53. USAID, Gender Analysis for Georgia’s Basic Education Project, 2018. 54. USAID, Gender-Sensitive Indicators for Use in Europe and Eurasia, 2016. https://usaidlearninglab.org/sites/default/files/resource/files/gender-sensitive_indicators_for_europe_and_eurasia.pdf 55. USAID, Toward Gender Equality in Europe and Eurasia: A Toolkit for Analysis, 2012. https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/EE-Gender-Analysis-Toolkit-June-2012.pdf 56. USAID, Youth Analysis for Economic Governance and Leadership, 2017. 57. USAID, Youth Analysis for Elections and Political Processes Project, 2018. 58. USAID, Women with Disabilities in the Europe & Eurasia Region, 2012. https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/Women-with-Disabilities-EE-Region-FINAL-2012.pdf 59. U.S Department of State, Country Report on Human Rights Practices in Georgia¸ 2018. https://www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/hrrpt/2018/eur/289131.htm 60. U.S Department of State, 2018 Country Report on Human Rights Practices for 2018 in Georgia, 2019. https://www.state.gov/documents/organization/289375.pdf 61. U.S Department of State, 2018 Trafficking in Persons Report, 2018. https://www.state.gov/j/tip/rls/tiprpt/ 62. WHO, Georgia: Profile of Health and Well-Being, 2017. http://www.euro.who.int/en/publications/abstracts/georgia.-profile-on-health-and-well-being-2017 63. WISG, GYLA, EMC, Report on the monitoring of the implementation of human rights strategies and action plans for 2016-2017. http://ewmi-prolog.org/images/files/4386HumanRightsActionPlanMonitoringReportWISG.pdf 64. World Bank, Enterprise Surveys, Georgia, 2013. http://www.enterprisesurveys.org/data/exploreeconomies/2013/georgia 65. World Bank, Georgia Country Gender Assessment, 2016. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/254561487249566895/Georgia-country-gender-assessment-2016 66. World Bank, Georgia: Recent Trends and Drivers of Poverty Reduction, 2016. http://www.worldbank.org/en/country/georgia/publication/georgia-poverty-assessment 67. World Bank, Occupational Segregation and Declining Wage Gap, The Case of Georgia, 2015. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/133851536843571958/Occupational-Segregation-and-Declining-Gender-Wage-Gap-The-Case- of-Georgia 68. World Bank, Technical Assistance to Support Reforms to the Higher Education Financing System in Georgia (P164779), Final Report, December 2018.

Georgia Gender Analysis - 65 - USAID/Georgia

http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/895021551184190719/Report-on-Georgia-Higher-Education-Funding-Reform.docx 69. World Bank, The Global Findex Database, 2017. file:///C:/Users/ddzebisashvili/Downloads/9781464812590.pdf 70. World Bank, Women, Business and the Law 2019: A Decade of Reform, 2019. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/31327/WBL2019.pdf 71. World Economic Forum, The Global Gender Gap Report, 2018. https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-global-gender-gap-report-2018

Georgia Gender Analysis - 66 - USAID/Georgia

USAID Mission in Georgia

29 Georgian-American Friendship Avenue Tbilisi 0131 Georgia

Georgia Gender Analysis - 67 - USAID/Georgia