DOCSLIB.ORG

Dcn: 2010-Geo-033

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT MUNICIPAL ROAD REHABILITATION REPORT GEORGIA MUNICIPAL INFRASTRUCTURE AND IDP HOUSING REHABILITATION PROJECT CONTRACT: AID-EDH-I-00-08-00027-00, TASK ORDER: AID-114-TO-11- 00002 IDP DURABLE DCN: 2010-GEO-033 1 January 2012; Revised 24 February 2012 DISCLAIMER The author’s views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government This report was prepared for the United States Agency for International Development 25 February 2012 Mr. Bradley Carr Water Irrigation and Infrastructure Advisor Office of Economic Growth US Agency for International Development 11 George Balanchine Street Tbilisi, 0131 Georgia Re: Environmental Assessment for Municipal Road Rehabilitation Dear Mr. Carr: This report is being submitted to you in accordance with the requirements of task order no. AID- 114-TO-11-00002 of contract AID-EDH-I-00-08-00027-00. It provides Tetra Tech’s Environmental Revised Environmental Assessment for Municipal Road Rehabilitation after responding to BEU comments and questions.. We look forward to your review and welcome your comments and suggestions. Very truly yours, Jeffrey W. Fredericks, P.E., PhD Chief of Party Tetra Tech, Inc. USAID/ Caucasus – Municipal Infrastructure and IDP Housing Rehabilitation Project (GMIP) 10th Floor, 154 Aghmashenebeli Ave. Tbilisi, 0102, Georgia Tel: +995322910401, Fax: +995322910401 Email: [email protected] CC: USAID (George Kokochashvili); MDF (Kartlos Gviniashvili); Tetra Tech (Firouz Rooyani, Dean White, Tom Chicca, Ilia Eloshvili) USAID/ Caucasus Municipal Infrastructure and IDP Housing Rehabilitation Project 10th Floor 154 Aghmashenebeli Ave.Tbilisi, 0102, Georgia Tel: +995-322910401, Fax: +995-322910401 Table of Contents 1. Summary ................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Description of the Project ................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Project Context ................................................................................................................. 2 1.3 Summary of 22 CFR 216 Requirements, IEE Summary, Scoping Process ..................... 2 1.4 Major Conclusions ........................................................................................................... 2 1.5 Areas of Controversy and Issues to be Resolved ............................................................. 4 2. Underlying Purpose and Need to Which Proposed Action is Responding ...... 5 2.1 Project Description ........................................................................................................... 5 2.2 Purpose and Need for the Proposed Action ..................................................................... 5 2.3 Status of Environmental Compliance Documentation ..................................................... 6 2.3.1 Summary of 22 CFR 216 Requirements and the IEE for GMIP Component 1 ........ 6 2.3.2 Environmental Scoping Statement ............................................................................ 6 2.3.3 Stakeholder Engagement and Host Government Consultation ................................. 7 2.3.4 Host Country Environmental Context ...................................................................... 7 3. Alternatives Including the Proposed Action ...................................................... 8 3.1 Description of Project Alternatives .................................................................................. 8 3.1.1 Alternative 1 – Proposed Action ............................................................................... 8 3.1.2 Alternative 2– Restructured Roads Program .......................................................... 10 3.1.3 Alternative 3 – No Action Alternative .................................................................... 11 3.2 Alternatives Eliminated from Analysis and Rationale for Eliminating Alternatives ..... 11 3.3 Comparison of Environmental Impacts of Program Alternatives .................................. 12 3.4 Discussion & Ranking of Alternatives with Respect to Significance of Environmental Impacts of Alternatives ............................................................................................................. 12 4. Affected Environment ......................................................................................... 14 4.1 Population Characteristics .............................................................................................. 14 4.1.1 Population ............................................................................................................... 14 4.1.2 Economy ................................................................................................................. 14 4.1.3 Public Health ........................................................................................................... 15 4.2 Natural and Cultural Heritage ........................................................................................ 15 4.2.1 Historical and Cultural Heritage ............................................................................. 15 4.2.2 Protected Areas ....................................................................................................... 15 4.3 Project Beneficiaries ...................................................................................................... 16 4.4 Geographic Characteristics ............................................................................................ 17 4.5 Environmental Baseline of Project Sites ........................................................................ 17 4.5.1 Affected Environment: Gori Municipality.............................................................. 17 4.5.2 Affected Environment: Mtskheta Municipality ...................................................... 20 4.5.3 Affected Environment: Oni Municipality ............................................................... 23 4.5.4 Affected Environment: Kareli Municipality ........................................................... 26 4.5.5 Affected Environment: Dusheti Municipality ........................................................ 29 4.6 Policy, Legal, Regulatory and Permitting Requirements ............................................... 31 4.6.1 International Standards and Best Practices ............................................................. 33 4.6.2 Relevant and Applicable Permitting Requirements ................................................ 34 5. Environmental Consequences ............................................................................ 36 i 5.1 Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action and Alternatives ................................. 36 5.1.1 Direct & Indirect Effects and their Significance..................................................... 36 5.1.2 Issues eliminated from further evaluation ............................................................... 42 5.1.3 Possible Conflicts between Proposed Action and Land Use .................................. 43 5.1.4 Possible Conflicts between Proposed Action and Policies and Controls ............... 44 5.2 Energy Requirements of Alternatives ............................................................................ 44 5.3 Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources .............................................. 44 5.4 Means to Mitigate Adverse Environmental Impacts ...................................................... 44 6. Environmental Mitigation and Monitoring Plans ........................................... 46 6.1 Environmental Mitigation and Monitoring Plans .......................................................... 46 7. LIST OF PREPARERS ...................................................................................... 58 8. APPENDICES ..................................................................................................... 59 Appendix 8.1 Details of Scoping Meeting ................................................................................ 60 Appendix 8.2 Summary of Impacts Identified for Municipal Road Rehabilitation Activities . 68 Appendix 8.3 Photographs from Site Visits During the EA Phase .......................................... 73 Appendix8.4 Project Maps and Site Visit Engineering Reports (August/September 2011) (Under separate cover) LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES List of Tables Table 2.1: Local Permits Required for Road Rehabilitation Table 3.1: Comparison of Alternatives Table 4.1: Principal Laws and Regulations Relevant to the Proposed Project Table 5.1: Concerns that have been Eliminated from Further Evaluation Table 6.1: Environmental Mitigation and Monitoring Plan for Road Rehabilitation Table 6.2: Environmental Mitigation and Monitoring Plan for Road Operation and Maintenance List of Figures Figure 4.1: Map of Georgia’s Protected Areas Figure 4.2: Satellite Image of Oni Figure 4.3: Map of Dusheti and Dushetiskhevi River Catchment ii ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ARWR Actual Renewable Water Resources BEO USAID Europe and Eurasia Bureau Environmental Officer CFR Code of Federal Regulations EA Environmental Assessment EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EMMP Environmental Mitigation and Monitoring Plan EPI Economic Prosperity Initiative (USAID Project) ESS Environmental Scoping Statement Geo Geo Ltd GMIP Municipal Infrastructure And IDP Housing Rehabilitation Project (the project) GoG Government
Recommended publications
  • Working Paper March 2021 #12

    Working Paper March 2021 #12

    GIP W O R K I N G P A P E R MARCH 2021 #12 GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES OF ABKHAZIA AND THE FORMER AUTONOMOUS DISTRICT OF SOUTH OSSETIA IN TBILISI: POWER AND LEGITIMACY IN EXILE Tornike Zurabashvili P I GEORGIAN INSTITUTE G OF POLITICS GIP WORKING PAPER MARCH 2021 #12 ABOUT THE AUTHOR Tornike Zurabashvili has a lengthy experience of working for non-governmental organizations and think tanks in Georgia and abroad. In 2017-2019, he was the Chief Editor of Civil.Ge, a trilingual online outlet on politics of Georgia. In 2019-2020, Tornike was a fellow of the Eurasia Democratic Security Network at the Center for Social Sciences in Tbilisi. He is currently the Programs Manager at the International Society for Fair Elections and Democracy (ISFED), an elections and democracy watchdog in Georgia. Tornike holds a Bachelor’s degree from Tbili si State University (International Affairs), and Master’s degrees from Ilia State University (Public Administration) and Trinity College Dublin (Political Science). He has also completed exchange and short-term programs at Charles, Tartu and Georgetown universities. He is currently pursuing a PhD in political science at Tbilisi State University. The original text is published in Georgian; Available here >> Georgian Institute of Politics (GIP) is a Tbilisi-based non-profit, non-partisan, research and analysis organization. GIP works to strengthen the organizational backbone of democratic institutions and promote good governance and development through policy research and advocacy in Georgia. This publication was produced as part of the research project Competency through Cooperation: Advancing knowledge on Georgia’s strategic path — GEOPATH funded by the Research Council of Norway.
  • News Digest on Georgia

    News Digest on Georgia

    NEWS DIGEST ON GEORGIA November 15-17 Compiled by: Aleksandre Davitashvili Date: November 18, 2019 Occupied Regions Tskhinvali Region (so called South Ossetia) 1. Tskhinvali Sends Detained Georgian Doctor to Pretrial Custody Tbilisi-based doctor, Vazha Gaprindashvili, who was detained by Russia-backed Tskhinvali region‟s “state security committee” near the occupation line with Akhalgori Municipality several days ago, was sentenced to pretrial custody, the Georgian State Security Service confirmed. According to media reports, prior to calling his wife and saying he was detained and transferred to Tskhinvali, Vazha Gaprindashvili told his family on November 9 that he was leaving Tbilisi for some business (Civil.ge, November 15, 2019). 2. President Calls for Releasing Georgian Doctor Detained in Tskhinvali Georgian President Salome Zurabishvili calls on the heads of international organizations “to use all available means” to achieve the release of Georgian doctor Vazha Gaprindashvili. Gaprindashvili, who “arrived in the [occupied Tskhinvali] region to perform his professional duties,” was detained near the occupation line with Akhalgori Municipality and later sentenced to pretrial custody in Tskhinvali. In a statement, the President noted that “there is a severe crisis in the occupied Tskhinvali region and it has become even sharper today.” Therefore, Zurabishvili called on the heads of international organizations to take necessary measures to improve the situation on the ground (Civil.ge, November 16, 2019). 3. Georgian MFA Statement on Doctor Gaprindashvili’s Detention in Tskhinvali Georgian Foreign Ministry reported on November 16 that it is “using all of its diplomatic tools” aimed at suspending illegal processes on occupied territories and improving human rights situation on the ground.
  • Economic Prosperity Initiative

    Economic Prosperity Initiative

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

    Survey of Water, Sanitation and HYGIENE Conditions in Public Schools

    SURVEY OF WATER, SANITATION AND HYGIENE CONDITIONS IN Georgia, 2013 PUBLIC SCHOOLS Educational and Scientific Infrastructure Development Agency, United Nations Children’s Find Georgia Office Contents Acronyms ...................................................................................................................................................... 2 Brief Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 3 Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 4 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 9 Survey Strategy ........................................................................................................................................... 13 Main Findings .............................................................................................................................................. 17 Water ...................................................................................................................................................... 17 Sanitation ................................................................................................................................................ 28 Hygiene ..................................................................................................................................................
  • Urban Development in Georgia

    Urban Development in Georgia

    Key facts and figures relating to housing and urban development in Georgia Nino Gventsadze Head of spatial planning department Ministry of regional development and infrastructure of Georgia Housing in Georgia Current conditions Housing in Georgia is characterized with long and deep systematic crisis which are caused by the following reasons: non- existent policy, non-sufficient legislative base and non-adequate institutional set-up. Georgian government still doesn’t have a well-defined, clear policy in the field of Housing, also not a single office directly governs and works on Housing issues neither on legislation or enforcement level. Estimated future plan in Housing • To define short, medium and long term priorities Short term priority – should focus on how to fix homelessness, clearly define the terminology, exact identification of beneficiary groups and setting criteria for people who will receive the support, launching an institution, drafting legislation etc. Medium and long term - should focus on large number of people who will be able to afford the Housing (affordable Housing), provide an adequate Housing, improve policy making in regard of construction and urban development, solving demographic issues in the country etc. Improvements In 2018, Government of Georgia has taken a duty in implementing a “Housing policy documentation and strategic plan”, for that reason in 2019, April a special committee was established who will define a strategic plan. So far consultations are taking place. It is planned to make an amendments in legislation (In Georgian legislation there is the only law, which is dedicated to housing and needs a great deal of revise and improvement) The Ministry of Internally Displaced Persons from the Occupied Territories and Refugees of Georgia has realized several projects: • Ministry purchased 300 accommodations from the Chinese company “Hualing” • Throughout the country, ministry purchased several accommodations from developers, reconstructed, built new constructions etc.
  • ICC-01/15 13 October 2015 Original

    ICC-01/15 13 October 2015 Original

    ICC-01/15-4 13-10-2015 1/160 EO PT Original: English No.: ICC-01/15 Date: 13 October 2015 PRE-TRIAL CHAMBER I Before: Judge Joyce Aluoch, Presiding Judge Judge Cuno Tarfusser Judge Péter Kovács SITUATION IN GEORGIA Public Document with Confidential, EX PARTE, Annexes A,B, C, D.2, E.3, E.7, E.9, F H and Public Annexes 1, D.1, E.1, E.2, E.4, E.5, E.6, E.8,G ,I, J Request for authorisation of an investigation pursuant to article 15 Source: Office of the Prosecutor ICC-01/15 1/160 13 October 2015 ICC-01/15-4 13-10-2015 2/160 EO PT Document to be notified in accordance with regulation 31 of the Regulations of the Court to: The Office of the Prosecutor Counsel for the Defence Mrs Fatou Bensouda Mr James Stewart Legal Representatives of the Victims Legal Representatives of the Applicants Unrepresented Victims Unrepresented Applicants The Office of Public Counsel for The Office of Public Counsel for the Victims Defence States’ Representatives Amicus Curiae REGISTRY Registrar Defence Support Section Mr Herman von Hebel Victims and Witnesses Unit Detention Section No. ICC-01/15 2/160 13 October 2015 ICC-01/15-4 13-10-2015 3/160 EO PT Table of Contents with Confidential, EX PARTE, Annexes C, D,E.3, E.7,E.9 H and Public Annexes, A, B,D, E.1, E.2, E.4, E.5, E.6, E.8, F,G,I,J................................................................................................1 Request for authorisation of an investigation pursuant to article 15 ....................................1 I.
  • TERMS of REFERENCE Consultancy Service for Project Results Monitoring & Evaluation for the Third Regional Development Projec

    TERMS of REFERENCE Consultancy Service for Project Results Monitoring & Evaluation for the Third Regional Development Projec

    TERMS OF REFERENCE Consultancy Service for Project Results Monitoring & Evaluation Section 1.Backgroundfor the Third Regional Development Project (RDP3) The Government of Georgia with World Bank are co-financing is implementing a US$75 million Third Regional Development Project (RDP3), focusing on Samtskhe-Javakheti and Mtskheta-Mtianeti during the period of 2015-2019. The Project Development Objective is to improve infrastructure services and institutional capacity to support increased contribution of tourism in the local economy of the Samtskhe-Javakheti and Mtskheta- Mtianeti regions. The project aims at addressing challenges identified during the project preparation period and follows integrated approach to urban and tourism development. Through its various components the project is expected to lead to improved urban and tourist infrastructure, enhanced cultural heritage assets and increased capacity for tourism-based local economic development in these two regions. The economic benefits linked to the above are multiple, such as improved urban infrastructure, including public spaces, streetscapes and municipal roads, improved urban liveability and increased safety of movement for locals. At the same time, these investments are expected to make selected municipalities better places to visit and more attractive places to invest, promoting private investment and increasing income generating opportunities in the project area. Cultural heritage enhancements will lead to the preservation of global public goods, but are also expected to lead to increased willingness to visit/pay for tourist and increased property prices in neighbouring areas. The proposed investments are aligned with the regional development strategies, prepared with technical assistance from EU for Mtskheta-Mtianeti and by GiZ for Samtskhe-Javakheti.
  • World Bank Document

    World Bank Document

    Public Disclosure Authorized Urban regeneration of historical streets in Dusheti Public Disclosure Authorized Environmental Review Third Regional Development Project Public Disclosure Authorized Funded by the World Bank January 2018 Public Disclosure Authorized Description of Subproject The sub-project (SP) envisages urban regeneration of historical district in the town of Dusheti. Dusheti Municipality belongs to the Mtskheta-Mtianeti region. It is situated at an altitude of 900 meters above the sea level. Town of Dusheti is 50 kilometers away from Tbilisi and accessing the site is possible via Tbilisi-Mtskheta-Stepantsminda highway. The SP envisages urban regeneration of the historical houses in Dusheti; in particular: 9 houses on the Erekle II Street (#1, #3, #5, #7, #9-#11, #13, #15, #17), 2 houses on Kostava street (#30, #32), 5 houses on St. Nino’s street (#14, #16, #18, #19, #20), 11 houses and 3 building on Shota Rustaveli street (Houses: #39, #41, #43, #45 #51, #68, #70, #72, #74, #76, buildings: #14, #19, #56 and #64), the so-called House of Aperlov located at the intersection of Tsotne Dadiani str. #6 and Shamanauri str. #16 as well as one separately placed house on the so-called Theatre Street (#2) – house of Ilia Chavchavadze (famous Georgian writer), 3 houses on Ilia Chavchavadze street (#6, #8, #10 ), 6 houses on Shamanauri Street (#6, #12, #14, #22, #55, #57). Overall, the SP will rehabilitate 37 residential houses and 3 public buildings. 24 of them have a status of the cultural heritage monuments (Order No. 03/224, 12.12.2013 of the Ministry of Culture and Monuments Protection).
  • GEORGIA Second Edition March 2010

    GEORGIA Second Edition March 2010

    WHO DOES WHAT WHERE IN DISASTER RISK REDUCTION IN GEORGIA Second edition March 2010 Georgian National Committee of Disaster Risk Reduction & Environment Sustainable Development FOREWORD Georgia is a highly disaster-prone country, which frequently experiences natural hazards (e.g. earthquakes, floods, landslides, mudflows, avalanches, and drought) as well as man-made emergencies (e.g. industrial accidents and traffic accidents). Compounding factors such as demographic change, unplanned urbanization, poorly maintained infrastructure, lax enforcement of safety standards, socio-economic inequities, epidemics, environmental degradation and climate variability amplify the frequency and intensity of disasters and call for a proactive and multi-hazard approach. Disaster risk reduction is a cross-cutting and complex development issue. It requires political and legal commitment, public understanding, scientific knowledge, careful development planning, responsible enforcement of policies and legislation, people-centred early warning systems, and effective disaster preparedness and response mechanisms. Close collaboration of policy-makers, scientists, urban planners, engineers, architects, development workers and civil society representatives is a precondition for adopting a comprehensive approach and inventing adequate solutions. Multi-stakeholder and inter-agency platforms can help provide and mobilize knowledge, skills and resources required for mainstreaming disaster risk reduction into development policies, for coordination of planning and programmes,
  • Community Based and Civil Society Organizations of Mtskheta-Mtianeti Region S

    Community Based and Civil Society Organizations of Mtskheta-Mtianeti Region S

    COMMUNITY BASED AND CIVIL SOCIETY ORGANIZATIONS OF MTSKHETA-MTIANETI REGION S E S C I L V A R CARING O E G MANAGEMENT S MISSION NON-GOVERNMENTAL VISION ORGANIZATIONS STRATEGY TEAMWORKH ELP LIFE GOALS STRATEGY NON-GOVERNMENTAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES CARING VISION MTSKHETA-MTIANETI 2 0 2 0 Community Based and Civil Society Organizations of Mtskheta-Mtianeti Region The information leaflet was published with the support of the European Union (EU) and the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung (KAS) as part of the Georgian Civil Society Sustainability Initiative project. Its content is entirely the responsibility of the Mtskheta-Mtianeti Regional Hub “For Better Future» and may not reflect the views of the European Union (EU) and the Konrad- Adenauer-Stiftung (KAS). ”Georgian Civil Society Sustainability Initiative” was developed and is implemented by the consortium lead by the Konrad - Adenauer - Stiftung in cooperation with four Georgian Civil Society Organizations: Civil Society Institute (CSI), Center for Training and Consultancy (CTC), Center for Strategic Research and Development of Georgia (CSRDG) and the Education Development and Employment Center (EDEC). The project is funded by the European Union and co-financed by the Konrad-Adenauer- Stiftung. Mtskheta-Mtianeti 2020 3 About the information brochure The information brochure presents 34 Community Based and Civil Society organizations of Mtskheta-Mtianeti Region. Organizations are divided according to the municipalities and each organization page contains basic contact information and fields of activity. This information was shared with Mtskheta-Mtianeti Regional Hub by the heads or contact persons of each organization and is based on November 2020 data resources. The information brochure aims to promote the community based and civil society organizations in the region.
  • Realizing the Urban Potential in Georgia: National Urban Assessment

    Realizing the Urban Potential in Georgia: National Urban Assessment

    REALIZING THE URBAN POTENTIAL IN GEORGIA National Urban Assessment ASIAN DEVELOPMENT BANK REALIZING THE URBAN POTENTIAL IN GEORGIA NATIONAL URBAN ASSESSMENT ASIAN DEVELOPMENT BANK Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 IGO license (CC BY 3.0 IGO) © 2016 Asian Development Bank 6 ADB Avenue, Mandaluyong City, 1550 Metro Manila, Philippines Tel +63 2 632 4444; Fax +63 2 636 2444 www.adb.org Some rights reserved. Published in 2016. Printed in the Philippines. ISBN 978-92-9257-352-2 (Print), 978-92-9257-353-9 (e-ISBN) Publication Stock No. RPT168254 Cataloging-In-Publication Data Asian Development Bank. Realizing the urban potential in Georgia—National urban assessment. Mandaluyong City, Philippines: Asian Development Bank, 2016. 1. Urban development.2. Georgia.3. National urban assessment, strategy, and road maps. I. Asian Development Bank. The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Asian Development Bank (ADB) or its Board of Governors or the governments they represent. ADB does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this publication and accepts no responsibility for any consequence of their use. This publication was finalized in November 2015 and statistical data used was from the National Statistics Office of Georgia as available at the time on http://www.geostat.ge The mention of specific companies or products of manufacturers does not imply that they are endorsed or recommended by ADB in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. By making any designation of or reference to a particular territory or geographic area, or by using the term “country” in this document, ADB does not intend to make any judgments as to the legal or other status of any territory or area.
  • Competetive Advantages of Imereti, Guria and Racha-Lechkhumi

    Competetive Advantages of Imereti, Guria and Racha-Lechkhumi

    Competetive Advantages of Imereti, Guria and Racha-Lechkhumi Tbilisi 2019 Research report: Competitive Advantages of Imereti, Guria and Racha- Lechkhumi is elaborated by Caucasus University, Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University (TSU) and City Institute Georgia (CIG ) Research authors: Ioseb Berikashvili, Ioseb Salukvadze, Otar Kakhidze, Irakli Gabriadze, Davit Petriashvili, Ia Iashvili; Elene Darjania The authors express their gratitude to the CTC staff for the organizational support in the preparation of the research report. Special thanks go to the governors of Imereti, Guria and Racha-Lechkhumi and all the representatives of the municipalities of these regions, who contributed by providing information necessary for creating this report. This publication was produced with the financial support of the European Union. Its contents are the sole responsibility of authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the European Union. 1 Contents Maps used in the research ........................................................................................ 2 List of the tables ......................................................................................................... 3 List of figures ............................................................................................................... 4 Spatial Features of the Research Area .................................................................. 6 Introduction .................................................................................................................