DOCSLIB.ORG

Trade Facilitation and Institutional Support Project for Armenia

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Trade Facilitation and Institutional Support Project for Armenia The European Union’s TACIS TRACECA Programme for Armenia, --- Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Moldova, Romania, Tajikistan, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, Uzbekistan Trade Facilitation and Institutional Support Project for Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Moldova, Romania, Tajikistan, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, Uzbekistan Progress Report II August 2005 This project is funded by A project implemented by the European Union Dornier Consulting & KLC Consortium TFIS Progress Report I February 2005 REPORT COVER PAGE Project Title Trade Facilitation and Institutional Support Contract Number 81324 Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Countries Moldova, Romania, Tajikistan, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, Uzbekistan. Local operator EC Consultant Consortium of Dornier Consulting Name PS IGC TRACECA / KLC AZ 1005, Zeppelin-Werftgelaende 31 8/2, Aliyarbekov St. Postfach 1307 Address Baku , Azerbaijan D-88003 Friedrichshafen AZ 370000 Germany Tel. number +99412 498 27 18 +49 7545 85306 Fax number +99412 498 64 26 +49 7545 85447 [email protected]; E-mail [email protected] [email protected] Contact Person Mrs. Lyudmila TRENKOVA Dr. Martin BOTH Signature ------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------ Date of report: August 2005 Reporting period: September 2004 – August 2005 Author of report: Dornier Consulting GmbH /KLC TRACECA _________________ _________________ _____________ [Task manager] [name] [signature] [date] EC M & E team _________________ _________________ _____________ [name] [signature] [date] EC Delegation _________________ _________________ _____________ [name] [signature] [date] 2 TFIS Progress Report II August 2005 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS:.................................................................................................................. 6 1 PROJECT SYNOPSIS...................................................................................................................................................... 7 2 SUMMARY OF THE PROJECT PROGRESS SINCE THE START ................................................................................. 9 A Development and Follow – Up of the TRACECA Visa and TRACECA Freight Documentation (Freight Pilot Schemes) ......................................................................................................................................................................... 9 2.1. A - DEVELOPMENT AND FOLLOW – UP OF THE TRACECA VISA................................................................. 9 2.2. A - SIMPLIFIED FREIGHT PILOT SCHEMES.................................................................................................. 12 B TRACECA Hotline and Enhanced Communication Initiatives................................................................................... 14 2.1. B - TRACECA HOTLINE................................................................................................................................... 14 2.2. B - ENHANCED COMMUNICATION INITIATIVES.......................................................................................... 18 2.2.1.B - TRACECA WEB PAGE ................................................................................................................. 18 2.2.2.B - WEB CAMS .................................................................................................................................... 18 C Support of the IGC TRACECA and Permanent Secretariat ....................................................................................... 18 2.1. C - TRACECA WORKING GROUP MEETINGS AND IGC CONFERENCE ..................................................... 18 2.2. C - COOPERATION AND CO-ORDINATION WITH PROJECT PARTNERS, STAKEHOLDERS AND BENEFICIARIES........................................................................................................................................... 19 2.3. C - FINANCING OF THE PS AND INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT TO THE TRACECA STRUCTURES............. 19 2.4. C - CAPACITY BUILDING ................................................................................................................................ 20 2.5. C - COORDINATION OF OTHER PROJECT ACTIVITIES, ASSISTANCE TO EC IN PROJECT IDENTIFICATION AND PREPARATION....................................................................................................... 20 2.6. C - TECHNICAL SUPPORT TO THE PS: DISSEMINATION, WEB-SITE ........................................................ 21 2.7. С - DATABASE ................................................................................................................................................. 21 3 SUMMARY OF THE PROJECT PLANNING FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE PROJECT........................................... 22 A Development and Follow up TRACECA Visa and TRACECA Freight Documentation............................................ 22 3.1. A - DEVELOPMENT AND FOLLOW – UP OF THE TRACECA VISA............................................................... 22 3.2. B - SIMPLIFIED FREIGHT PILOT SCHEMES.................................................................................................. 22 B TRACECA Hotline and enhanced Communication Initiatives................................................................................... 23 3.1. B - TRACECA HOTLINE................................................................................................................................... 23 3.2. B - ENHANCED COMMUNICATION INITIATIVES........................................................................................... 23 3.2.1.B - TRACECA WEB PAGE ........................................................................................................... 23 3.2.2.B - WEB CAMS ............................................................................................................................. 23 C Support to the IGC TRACECA and Permanent Secretariat ....................................................................................... 23 3.1. C - COOPERATION AND CO-ORDINATION WITH PROJECT PARTNERS, STAKEHOLDERS AND BENEFICIARIES .............................................................................................................................................. 23 3.2. C - FINANCING OF THE PS AND INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT TO THE TRACECA STRUCTURES............. 23 3.3. C - COORDINATION OF OTHER PROJECT ACTIVITIES, ASSISTANCE TO EC IN PROJECT IDENTIFICATION AND TOR PREPARATION.................................................................................................. 23 3.4. C - TECHNICAL SUPPORT TO THE PS: DISSEMINATION, WEB-SITE AND DATABASE............................ 23 4 PROJECT PROGRESS IN THE REPORTING PERIOD ................................................................................................ 25 A Development and Follow – up of the TRACECA Visa and TRACECA Freight Documentation .............................. 25 4.1. A - DEVELOPMENT AND FOLLOW – UP OF THE TRACECA VISA............................................................... 25 4.2. A - SIMPLIFIED FREIGHT PILOT SCHEMES.................................................................................................. 25 B TRACECA Hotline and Enhanced Communication Initiatives................................................................................... 25 4.1. B - TRACECA HOTLINE................................................................................................................................... 25 4.2. B - ENHANCED COMMUNICATION INITIATIVES........................................................................................... 26 4.2.1.B - TRACECA WEB PAGE ........................................................................................................... 26 4.2.2.B - WEB CAMS ............................................................................................................................. 26 C Support of the IGC TRACECA and Permanent Secretariat ....................................................................................... 26 4.1. C - COOPERATION AND CO-ORDINATION WITH PROJECT PARTNERS, STAKEHOLDERS AND BENEFICIARIES .............................................................................................................................................. 26 4.2. C - FINANCING OF THE PS AND INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT TO THE TRACECA STRUCTURES............. 26 3 TFIS Progress Report II August 2005 4.3. C - COORDINATION OF OTHER PROJECT ACTIVITIES, ASSISTANCE TO EC IN PROJECT IDENTIFICATION AND TOR PREPARATION.................................................................................................. 27 4.4. C - TECHNICAL SUPPORT TO THE PS: DISSEMINATION, WEB-SITE AND DATABASE............................ 27 PROJECT PROGRESS REPORT...................................................................................................................................... 28 OVERALL OUTPUT PERFORMANCE PLAN (1) .......................................................................................................... 30 OVERALL OUTPUT PERFORMANCE PLAN (2) .......................................................................................................... 31 RESOURCE UTILISATION REPORT...........................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Glaciers Change Over the Last Century, Caucasus Mountains, Georgia
    1 Glaciers change over the last century, Caucasus Mountains, 2 Georgia, observed by the old topographical maps, Landsat 3 and ASTER satellite imagery 4 5 L. G. Tielidze 6 7 Department of Geomorphology, Vakhushti Bagrationi Institute of Geography, Ivane 8 Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University, 6 Tamarashvili st. Tbilisi 0177, Georgia 9 10 Correspondence to: L. G. Tielidze ([email protected]) 11 12 13 Abstract 14 15 The study of glaciers in the Caucasus began in the first quarter of the 18th century. The 16 first data on glaciers can be found in the works of great Georgian scientist Vakhushti 17 Bagrationi. After almost hundred years the foreign scientists began to describe the 18 glaciers of Georgia. Information about the glaciers of Georgia can be found in the 19 works of W. Abich, D. Freshfield, G. Radde, N. Dinik, I. Rashevskiy, A. Reinhardt etc. The 20 first statistical information about the glaciers of Georgia are found in the catalog of the 21 Caucasus glaciers compiled by K. Podozerskiy in 1911. Then, in 1960s the large-scale 22 (1 : 25 000, 1 : 50 000) topographic maps were published, which were compiled in 23 1955–1960 on the basis of the airphotos. On the basis of the mentioned maps R. 24 Gobejishvili gave quite detailed statistical information about the glaciers of Georgia. Then 25 in 1975 the results of glaciers inventory of the former USSR was published, where the 26 statistical information about the glaciers of Georgia was obtained on the basis of the 27 almost same time (1955-1957) aerial images.
    [Show full text]
  • DG Consulting
    REF. NO.: IDA/TGSP/CS/CQS/02-2016 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND PREPARATION OF LAND ACQUISITION AND RESETTLEMENT POLICY FRAMEWORK FOR CONSTRUCTION OF 500 KV JVARI-TSKALTUBO OVERHEAD TRANSMISSION LINE AND ASSOCIATED SUBSTATION ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT INTERIM REPORT TECHNICAL PART, BASELINE AND VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT CLIENT: JSC GEORGIAN STATE ELECTROSYSTEM PROJECT : TRANSMISSION GRID STRENGTHENING PROJECT (TGSP) – P147348 41380_INTERIM_ V11, TBILISI, AUGUST 2017 DG Consulting Ltd Address: 10, Mirza Gelovani Street, 0160, Tbilisi, Georgia; Registered in Georgia, No 205 280 998; Tel: +995 322 380 313; +995 599 500 778; [email protected] 41380_r01_v02_GSE_ESIA_JvariTskaltubo Page 2 of 196 Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 8 ESIA Report Preparation Process and Structure ..................................................................... 9 2. Legal and Regulatory Framework .................................................................................................. 12 Georgian laws applicable for the environmental impact assessment .................................. 12 The technical standards and guidelines ........................................................................ 19 Environmental and Social Impact Assessment in Georgia .................................................... 20 Current EIA legislation ..................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Review of Fisheries and Aquaculture Development Potentials in Georgia
    FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Circular No. 1055/1 REU/C1055/1(En) ISSN 2070-6065 REVIEW OF FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE DEVELOPMENT POTENTIALS IN GEORGIA Copies of FAO publications can be requested from: Sales and Marketing Group Office of Knowledge Exchange, Research and Extension Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations E-mail: [email protected] Fax: +39 06 57053360 Web site: www.fao.org/icatalog/inter-e.htm FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Circular No. 1055/1 REU/C1055/1 (En) REVIEW OF FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE DEVELOPMENT POTENTIALS IN GEORGIA by Marina Khavtasi † Senior Specialist Department of Integrated Environmental Management and Biodiversity Ministry of the Environment Protection and Natural Resources Tbilisi, Georgia Marina Makarova Head of Division Water Resources Protection Ministry of the Environment Protection and Natural Resources Tbilisi, Georgia Irina Lomashvili Senior Specialist Department of Integrated Environmental Management and Biodiversity Ministry of the Environment Protection and Natural Resources Tbilisi, Georgia Archil Phartsvania National Consultant Thomas Moth-Poulsen Fishery Officer FAO Regional Office for Europe and Central Asia Budapest, Hungary András Woynarovich FAO Consultant FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS Rome, 2010 The designations employed and the presentation of material in this information product do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) concerning the legal or development status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The mention of specific companies or products of manufacturers, whether or not these have been patented, does not imply that these have been endorsed or recommended by FAO in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned.
    [Show full text]
  • Glacier Change Over the Last Century, Caucasus Mountains, Georgia, Observed from Old Topographical Maps, Landsat and ASTER Satellite Imagery
    The Cryosphere, 10, 713–725, 2016 www.the-cryosphere.net/10/713/2016/ doi:10.5194/tc-10-713-2016 © Author(s) 2016. CC Attribution 3.0 License. Glacier change over the last century, Caucasus Mountains, Georgia, observed from old topographical maps, Landsat and ASTER satellite imagery Levan G. Tielidze Department of Geomorphology, Vakhushti Bagrationi Institute of Geography, Ivane, Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University, 6 Tamarashvili st., 0177 Tbilisi, Georgia Correspondence to: Levan G. Tielidze ([email protected]) Received: 12 May 2015 – Published in The Cryosphere Discuss.: 17 July 2015 Revised: 29 February 2016 – Accepted: 11 March 2016 – Published: 21 March 2016 Abstract. Changes in the area and number of glaciers and global climate where other long-term records may not in the Georgian Caucasus Mountains were examined exist, as changes in glacier mass and/or extent can reflect over the last century, by comparing recent Landsat and changes in temperature and/or precipitation (e.g. Oerlemans ASTER images (2014) with older topographical maps (1911, and Fortuin, 1992; Meier et al., 2007). Regular and detailed 1960) along with middle and high mountain meteoro- observations of alpine glacier behaviour are necessary in re- logical stations data. Total glacier area decreased by gions such as the Georgian Caucasus, where the glaciers 8.1 ± 1.8 % (0.2 ± 0.04 % yr−1) or by 49.9 ± 10.6 km2 from are an important source of water for agricultural produc- 613.6 ± 9.8 km2 to 563.7 ± 11.3 km2 during 1911–1960, tion, and runoff in large glacially fed rivers (Kodori, Enguri, while the number of glaciers increased from 515 to 786.
    [Show full text]
  • Reserved Domains
    Countries: (.ge; .edu.ge; .org.ge; .net.ge; .pvt.ge; .school.ge) afghanistan cameroon ghana lebanon nigeria spain zambia albania canada greece lesotho norway srilanka zimbabwe algeria centralafricanrepublic grenada liberia oman sudan andorra chad guatemala libya pakistan suriname angola chile guinea liechtenstein palau swaziland antiguaandbarbuda china guinea-bissau lithuania palestina sweden argentina colombia guyana luxembourg panama switzerland armenia comoros haiti macau papuanewguinea syria aruba congo honduras macedonia paraguay taiwan australia costarica hongkong madagascar peru tajikistan austria croatia hungary malawi philippines tanzania azerbaijan cuba iceland malaysia poland thailand bahama curacao india maldives portugal timor-leste bahrain cyprus indonesia mali qatar togo bangladesh czechia iran malta romania tonga barbados denmark iraq marshallislands russia trinidadandtobago belarus djibouti ireland mauritania rwanda tunisia belgium dominica israel mauritius saintlucia turkey belize dominicanrepublic italy mexico samoa turkmenistan benin ecuador jamaica micronesia sanmarino tuvalu bhutan egypt japan moldova saudiarabia uganda birma elsalvador jordan monaco senegal ukraine bolivia equatorialguinea kazakhstan mongolia serbia unitedarabemirates bosniaandherzegovina eritrea kenya montenegro seychelles uk botswana estonia kiribati morocco sierraleone england brazil ethiopia northkorea mozambique singapore unitedkingdom brunei fiji korea namibia sintmaarten uruguay bulgaria finland southkorea nauru slovakia uzbekistan burkinafaso
    [Show full text]
  • National Report on the State of the Environment of Georgia
    National Report on the State of the Environment of Georgia 2007 - 2009 FOREWORD This National Report on the State of Environment 2007-2009 has been developed in accordance with the Article 14 of the Law of Georgia on Environmental Protection and the Presidential Decree N 389 of 25 June 1999 on the Rules of Development of National Report on the State of Environment. According to the Georgian legislation, for the purpose of public information the National Report on the State of Environment shall be developed once every three years. 2007-2009 National Report was approved on 9 December 2011. National Report is a summarizing document of all existing information on the state of the environment of Georgia complexly analyzing the state of the environment of Georgia for 2007-2009. The document describes the main directions of environmental policy of the country, presents information on the qualita- tive state of the environment, also presents information on the outcomes of the environmental activities carried out within the frames of international relations, and gives the analysis of environmental impact of different economic sectors. National Report is comprised of 8 Parts and 21 chapters: • Qualitative state of environment (atmospheric air, water resources, land resources, natural disasters, biodiversity, wastes and chemicals, ionizing radiation), • Environmental impact of different economic sectors (agriculture, forestry, transport, industry and en- ergy sector), • Environmental protection management (environmental policy and planning, environmental regula- tion and monitoring, environmental education and awareness raising). In the development of the present State of Environment (SOE) the Ministry of Environment Protection was assisted by the EU funded Project Support to the Improvement of the Environmental Governance in Georgia.
    [Show full text]
  • Causes of War Prospects for Peace
    Georgian Orthodox Church Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung CAUSES OF WAR PROS P E C TS FOR PEA C E Tbilisi, 2009 1 On December 2-3, 2008 the Holy Synod of the Georgian Orthodox Church and the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung held a scientific conference on the theme: Causes of War - Prospects for Peace. The main purpose of the conference was to show the essence of the existing conflicts in Georgia and to prepare objective scientific and information basis. This book is a collection of conference reports and discussion materials that on the request of the editorial board has been presented in article format. Publishers: Metropolitan Ananya Japaridze Katia Christina Plate Bidzina Lebanidze Nato Asatiani Editorial board: Archimandrite Adam (Akhaladze), Tamaz Beradze, Rozeta Gujejiani, Roland Topchishvili, Mariam Lordkipanidze, Lela Margiani, Tariel Putkaradze, Bezhan Khorava Reviewers: Zurab Tvalchrelidze Revaz Sherozia Giorgi Cheishvili Otar Janelidze Editorial board wishes to acknowledge the assistance of Irina Bibileishvili, Merab Gvazava, Nia Gogokhia, Ekaterine Dadiani, Zviad Kvilitaia, Giorgi Cheishvili, Kakhaber Tsulaia. ISBN 2345632456 Printed by CGS ltd 2 Preface by His Holiness and Beatitude Catholicos-Patriarch of All Georgia ILIA II; Opening Words to the Conference 5 Preface by Katja Christina Plate, Head of the Regional Office for Political Dialogue in the South Caucasus of the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung; Opening Words to the Conference 8 Abkhazia: Historical-Political and Ethnic Processes Tamaz Beradze, Konstantine Topuria, Bezhan Khorava - A
    [Show full text]
  • A Historical-Geographic Review of Modern Abkhazia
    A Historical-Geographic Review of Modern Abkhazia by T. Beradze, K. Topuria, B Khorava Abkhazia (Abkhazeti) – the farthest North-Western part of Georgia is situated between the rivers Psou and Inguri on the coast of the Black Sea. The formation of Abkhazia within the borders is the consequence of complicated ethno-political processes. Humans first settled on the territory of modern Abkhazia during the Paleolithic Era. Abkhazia is the place where Neolithic, Bronze and Early Iron Eras are represented at their best. The first Georgian state – the Kingdom of Egrisi (Kolkheti), formed in 15. to 14. century BC, existed till the 2.century BC. It used to include the entire South-Eastern and Eastern parts of the Black Sea littoral for ages. The territory of modern Abkhazia was also a part of the Egrisi Kingdom. Old Greek historical sources inform us that before the new millennium, the territory between the rivers Psou and Inguri was only populated with tribes of Georgian origin: the Kolkhs, Kols, Svan-Kolkhs, Geniokhs. The Kingdom of Old Egrisi fell at the end of the 2.century BC and was never restored till 2.century AD. Old Greeks, Byzantines and Romans called this state - Lazika, the same Lazeti, which was associated with the name of the ruling dynasty. In 3. and 4. centuries AD, entire Western Georgia, including the territory of present Abkhazia, was part of this state. Based on the data of Byzantine authors, the South-East coastline part of the territory – between rivers Kodori and Inguri - belonged to the Odishi Duchy. The source of the Kodori River was occupied by the Georgian tribe of Misimians that was directly subordinated to the King of Egrisi (Lazeti).
    [Show full text]
  • Reserved Domains
    Countries: (.ge; .edu.ge; .org.ge; .net.ge; .pvt.ge; .school.ge) afghanistan cameroon ghana greece lebanon nigeria spain zambia albania canada grenada lesotho liberia norway srilanka zimbabwe algeria centralafricanrepublic guatemala libya oman sudan andorra chad guinea liechtenstein pakistan palau suriname angola chile guinea-bissau lithuania palestina swaziland antiguaandbarbuda china guyana luxembourg panama sweden argentina colombia haiti macau papuanewguinea switzerland macedonia armenia comoros honduras paraguay peru syria madagascar aruba congo hongkong philippines taiwan malawi australia costarica hungary poland portugal tajikistan malaysia austria croatia iceland qatar romania tanzania maldives mali azerbaijan cuba india russia malta thailand bahama curacao indonesia marshallislands rwanda timor-leste bahrain cyprus iran iraq mauritania saintlucia togo tonga bangladesh czechia ireland mauritius samoa trinidadandtobago barbados denmark israel italy mexico sanmarino tunisia turkey belarus djibouti dominica jamaica micronesia saudiarabia turkmenistan belgium dominicanrepublic japan moldova senegal serbia tuvalu uganda seychelles belize ecuador egypt jordan monaco ukraine sierraleone benin elsalvador kazakhstan mongolia unitedarabemirates singapore bhutan equatorialguinea kenya montenegro uk england sintmaarten birma eritrea kiribati morocco unitedkingdom slovakia bolivia estonia northkorea mozambique uruguay slovenia bosniaandherzegovina korea namibia nauru uzbekistan ethiopia solomonislands botswana brazil southkorea nepal vatikan
    [Show full text]
  • Map 87 Pontus-Phasis Compiled by David Braund and T
    Map 87 Pontus-Phasis Compiled by David Braund and T. Sinclair (Turkey), 1997 with the assistance of Diane Braund Introduction Pontus The land of Pontus has two main parts, both of which belonged to the Mithridatic kingdom of Pontus in the Hellenistic period. The first is the main ridge of the Pontic mountains and the steep descent to the shore. The lower slopes are thickly wooded, and the shore districts have a humid and rainy climate. In the main Pontic ridge a gap occurs in the hinterland of Amisus (modern Samsun), after which the mountain chain continues at a lower height and with less abrupt slopes (Strabo’s term Paryadres seems to denote the higher part of the chain). As far east as Rhizaion (Rize) Greek settlements along the coast have existed since the sixth century B.C., and in the case of Sinope the seventh. To the south, the Pontic chain is bordered by Armenia Minor, a part of Armenia itself (Late Antique Sper, probably the Syspiritis of the classical authors), and what was to become the Georgian mountainous district of Tao, drained by the R. Glaukos (Oltu Çay) and the Tortum Çay. The district of Chaldia, the Gümüşhane basin, is difficult to classify, particularly in classical times, as there is no evidence that it belonged either to Pontus (in a geographical or administrative sense), to Armenia Minor, or to Armenia itself. The Roman empire made no effort to control the interior of Chaldia until the reign of Justinian. The second part of Pontus is the series of fertile inland plains, joined by relatively low chains of hills, in the river systems of the Iris (Kızıl Irmak) and the lower Halys (Yeşil Irmak).
    [Show full text]
  • The Abkhazia Border Within Russia According to 1989 Census Data and Politicized Linguistic Maps Prof
    Linguistic Situations in Conflict Regions – The Abkhazia Border within Russia according to 1989 Census Data and Politicized Linguistic Maps Prof. Dr. Tariel Putkaradze Before 1993 the majority of the autochthonous population of Abkhazia was Georgians. At the end of the 20th c. official and informal military troops of the Russian Federation expelled 350 000 Georgians and 30 000 Abkhaz from the autonomous republic. Some scholars try to provide the world with such linguistic maps of the site of this linguistic tragedy that suggest there are no and never had been any Georgian-speaking residents in Abkhazia. Below we provide the language situation description in north-west Georgia (We have referred to the official 1989 Soviet Union census data as basis for our argumentation). Keywords: Abkhazia, Linguistic Map, Linguistic Situation Abkhazia was historically a part of Georgia. Ten centuries ago it acted as a leading region for the development of the Georgian language spoken in united Georgia (Sakartvelo). Before 1993 the majority of the autochthonous population of Abkhazia was Georgians. Russia has always been interested in obtaining access to the Black Sea. That is why Russia has always tried to exile Georgians and Russian opponents from the historic territory of Georgia. The first ethnic cleansing took place in 1867 (nearly 40 000 Muslim Abkhazians were expelled in Turkey). The second cleansing occurred at the end of the 20th c. when 350 000 Georgians and 30 000 Abkhazians were driven out of the Autonomous Republic of Abkhazia. The presented problem is described based on the classification of the dialects of Georgians and those within their sphere of linguistic influence: Georgians have one centuries- old literary language – the Georgian/Kartvelian language – and more than ten varieties (dialects).
    [Show full text]
  • THE HISTORY of the FLORA and VEGETATION of GEORGIA (South Caucasus)
    GEORGIAN NATIONAL MUSEUM INSTITUTE OF PALEOBIOLOGY Irina Shatilova, Nino Mchedlishvili, Luara Rukhadze, Eliso Kvavadze THE HISTORY OF THE FLORA AND VEGETATION OF GEORGIA (South Caucasus) Tbilisi • 2011 Paleobotanical investigations have been carried out in Georgia (South Caucasus) since the early 20th century. In this work, we bring together the great body of research on fossil material from Georgia’s Phanerozoic deposits to provide descriptions of the floras, plant communities and paleogeographic conditions of past geological epochs. The paleofloras of Western Georgia, from the stratotypical region of Eastern Paratethys, are considered in particular detail as the Black Sea deposits provide a continuous fossil record spanning the entire Neogene and Quaternary. These sediments, dated biostratigaphically using marine fauna, contain rich paleobotanical material of both macrobotanical remains and palynomorphs. Pollen and spore assemblages from complete sections of various Upper Miocene, Pliocene, Pleistocene and Holocene stages have been interpreted using the landscape-phytocenological method, providing an almost uninterrupted reconstruction of vegetation and climate dynamics in Georgia. The work also contains complete flora lists of various stratigraphical units, palynological diagrams, maps of fossil localities and paleogeographical maps of Georgia. Editors: David Lordkipanidze Abesalom Vekua Reader: Simon E. Connor ISBN 978-9941-9105-3-1 © Georgian National Museum, 2011 CONTENTS Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................5
    [Show full text]