GEORGIA ELECTRICITY TRANSMISSION NETWORK DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
Environmental and Social Impact Assessment Volume 4 Social Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment Prepared for: GSE and EBRD
SLR Ref:901.12.1 Version No: C July 2019
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
BASIS OF REPORT
This document has been prepared by SLR Consulting Limited with reasonable skill, care and diligence, and taking account of the manpower, timescales and resources devoted to it by agreement with EBRD (the Client) as part or all of the services it has been appointed by the Client to carry out. It is subject to the terms and conditions of that appointment.
SLR shall not be liable for the use of or reliance on any information, advice, recommendations and opinions in this document for any purpose by any person other than the Client. Reliance may be granted to a third party only in the event that SLR and the third party have executed a reliance agreement or collateral warranty.
Information reported herein may be based on the interpretation of public domain data collected by SLR, and/or information supplied by the Client and/or its other advisors and associates. These data have been accepted in good faith as being accurate and valid.
The copyright and intellectual property in all drawings, reports, specifications, bills of quantities, calculations and other information set out in this report remain vested in SLR unless the terms of appointment state otherwise.
This document may contain information of a specialised and/or highly technical nature and the Client is advised to seek clarification on any elements which may be unclear to it.
Information, advice, recommendations and opinions in this document should only be relied upon in the context of the whole document and any documents referenced explicitly herein and should then only be used within the context of the appointment.
.
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1 Background ...... 1 1.2 Structure of the Report ...... 1
POLICY FRAMEWORK ...... 3 2.1 Georgian Legal Framework ...... 3 2.2 International conventions and treaties ...... 4 2.3 EBRD Policy Requirements and Guidelines ...... 4
METHODOLOGY ...... 6 3.1 Introduction ...... 6 3.2 Study Area ...... 6 3.3 Baseline methodology...... 9 3.3.1 Scoping meetings ...... 9 3.3.2 Collection of available secondary data ...... 10 3.3.3 Qualitative data collection ...... 10 3.4 Impact assessment methodology ...... 13 3.4.1 Impact assessment ...... 13 3.4.2 Mitigation hierarchy ...... 17 3.5 Data and assessment limitations ...... 17
PROJECT-WIDE BASELINE INFORMATION ...... 19 4.1 Introduction ...... 19 4.2 Administrative context and governance ...... 19 4.2.1 Recent administrative history ...... 19 4.2.2 Administrative divisions ...... 20 4.3 Demography ...... 20 4.3.1 Ethnicity and national minorities ...... 22 4.3.2 Religion ...... 23 4.4 Vulnerable groups ...... 23 4.5 Georgian Economy ...... 25 4.6 Social organisation and women’s position ...... 26 4.6.1 Social organisation at family level ...... 26 4.6.2 Women’s accession to resource and ownership ...... 26 4.6.3 Gendered activities and employment ...... 27
.
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
4.7 Community Health and Safety ...... 27 4.7.1 Potential receptors ...... 27 4.8 Land tenure and access to natural resources ...... 29 4.8.1 Overview of land management and administration system in Georgia ...... 29 4.8.2 Access to resources ...... 30 4.9 Transport infrastructures ...... 30 4.9.1 Road network ...... 30 4.9.2 Airports...... 31 4.9.3 Railway ...... 32 4.10 Cultural Heritage ...... 32 4.10.1 Tangible Cultural heritage ...... 33 4.10.2 Intangible Cultural Heritage ...... 40
PROJECT-WIDE IMPACT ASSESSMENT ...... 43 5.1 Introduction ...... 43 5.2 Positive impacts ...... 43 5.2.1 Construction ...... 43 5.2.2 Operation ...... 44 5.3 Negative impacts ...... 45 5.3.1 Land acquisition and involuntary resettlement ...... 45 5.3.2 Interaction with Community infrastructures ...... 51 5.3.3 Community Health and safety ...... 52 5.3.4 Occupational Health and Safety ...... 56 5.3.5 Cultural heritage ...... 57
PROJECT-WIDE MITIGATION ...... 60 6.1 Introduction ...... 60 6.2 Mitigation measures ...... 60 6.2.1 Positive impacts – enhancement measures ...... 60 6.2.2 Land acquisition and involuntary resettlement ...... 60 6.2.3 Interaction with Community infrastructure ...... 62 6.2.4 Community Health and safety ...... 63 6.2.5 Occupational Health and Safety ...... 67 6.2.6 Cultural Heritage...... 68
PROJECT-WIDE SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION COMMITMENTS ...... 70
REFERENCES ...... 80
.
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
DOCUMENT REFERENCES
TABLES Table 3.1 – Areas crossed by the Project Components ...... 7 Table 3.2 - Scoping meetings ...... 9 Table 3.3 – Municipalities and Communities included in the detailed walkover segments ...... 12 Table 3.4– Assessment criteria for sensitivity of socioeconomic receptors ...... 13 Table 3.5 - Impact Significance Matrix – Sensitivity vs Magnitude Severity ...... 17 Table 4.1 – Georgian population by region ...... 21 Table 4.2 – Percentage of potential sensitive area ...... 28 Table 4.3 – Number of urban and rural sensitive area in each component ...... 28 Table 4.4 – UNESCO WHS and candidate WHS in Georgia ...... 36 Table 4.5 – NACHP National monuments ...... 37 Table 4.6 – Registry of Intangible Cultural Heritage of Georgia ...... 40 Table 5.1 – Estimated number of workers for transmission line construction ...... 44 Table 5.2 – Estimated permanent Land acquisitions for the all Project ...... 46 Table 5.3 – Permanent restriction on land for the all Project ...... 47 Table 5.4 – Overview of potential physical displacement by Project Components ...... 49 Table 5.5 – Land use categories and their sensitivity ...... 49 Table 5.6 – Overview of number of land plots potentially impacted by Project Components ...... 50 Table 5.7 – Limits for general public exposure to electric and magnetic fields ...... 55 Table 6.1 - Alternating Current - Minimum Working Distances for Trained Employees ...... 67 Table 6.2 - ICNIRP exposure limits for occupational exposure to electric and magnetic fields ...... 68
FIGURES Figure 4.1 – Number of registered IDPs by region in Georgia (2014) ...... 24 Figure 4.2 – National road network ...... 31 Figure 4.3 – Georgian railway network ...... 32
MAPS Map 3.1 – Study area ...... 8 Map 4.1 – World and national interest cultural sites...... 38
.
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
APPENDICES Appendix 01: List of interviews
.
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Acronyms
Acronym Description
CSR Corporate Social Responsibility EBRD European Bank for Reconstruction and Development EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EPC Engineering-Procurement-Construction E&S Environmental & Social ESAP Environmental & Social Action Plan ESIA Environmental & Social Impact Assessment EU European Union FAO Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations FS Feasibility Study GEL Georgian Lari GIP Good Industry Practices GRC Grievance Resolution Committee GRM Grievance Resolution Mechanism GSE Georgian State Electrosystem HPP Hydropower Project IFC International Finance Cooperation LARCF Land Acquisition and Resettlement Compensation Framework MLARO Municipal LAR Office MoF Ministry of Finance NAPR National Agency of Public Survey NGO Non-Governmental Organization NTS Non-Technical Summary PAP Project Affected Person PRs EBRD Performance Requirements PRRC Property Rights recognition Commission PS IFC Performance Standards RAP Resettlement Action Plan
Page v
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Acronym Description
RMT Resettlement Management Team ROW Right of Way SEP Stakeholder Engagement Plan SoW Scope of Work TL Transmission Line
Page vi
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Preamble This document is the Social assessment of the Georgian Electricity Transmission Network Development projects (Project). It forms Volume 4 of the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) Report. The Project being developed by the Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) comprises the construction of new and in some cases rehabilitation of existing transmission lines and substations. Full details of the Project are outlined in Volume 2 Project Definition . In summary, the Project is formed into 5 geographical component areas (Project Components), Components A, B, C1, C2 and D. Each new or rehabilitated line and substation is given a Project name which is used throughout the documents. The following table provides an overview of the Project Components and the Project names.
Component & Project Component description Project names region
A - Tskaltubo to Akhaltsikhe and on to Turkey border at Vale: Samtskhe- - 500kV Tskaltubo to Akhaltsikhe substation Sairme line Javakheti & - 400kV Akhaltsikhe to Turkey border (and on to Tortum in Turkey) Tao line Imereti - Extension to the existing Akhaltsikhe Substation Akhaltsikhe extension B - Guria Ozugeti to Zoti HPP and connection from Ozurgeti to the Paliastomi line: - 110kV Ozurgeti to Zoti HPP powerhouse Guria line - 220kV Ozurgeti to Paliastomi loop in connection Paliastomi loop - 110/220kV Ozurgeti Substation Ozurgeti Substation C1 - Svaneti Nenskra to Mestia: - 110/220/500kV Nenskra Substation Nenskra Substation - 220kV Nenskra substation to Mestia HPPs Mestia line -500kV Kavkasioni loop in loop out to Nenskra Substation Kavkasioni loop C2 – Racha Lajanuri connections to Kheledula HPP, Oni HPP and Tskaltubo: Lechkhumi - 110/500kV Lajanuri Substation Lajanuri Substation & Imereti - 110kV Lajanuri to Oni HPP Oni HPP line - 110kV Lajanuri to Kheledula HPP Kheledula HPP line - 500kV Lajanuri to Tskaltubo Lechkhumi line - 220kV Lajanuri HPP to Lajanuri Substation Lajanuri HPP line - 220kV Rehabilitation of the existing 220kV Derchi line from New Derchi line Lajanuri to Tskaltubo, with new connections into Namakhvani HPP - 220kV Lajanuri Substation to Lajanuri HPP Lajanuri HPP line D - Kakheti Reinforcement of the transmission infrastructure in Kakheti: - 110/220kV line from Gurjaani to Telavi Gurjaani line - 110kV line from Telavi to Akhmeta, constructed on 220kV towers Akhmeta line - 110kV loop to Tsinandali Tsinandali line - 110kV loop to Mukuzani Mukuzani line - Rehabilitation and extension of 110kV Akhmeta Substation Akhmeta Substation
Page vii
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Component & Project Component description Project names region
- Rehabilitation and extension of 110/220kV Telavi Substation Telavi Substation - Rehabilitation of 110kV Tsinandali Substation Tsinandali Substation - Rehabilitation and extension of 110kV Mukuzani Substation Mukuzani Substation - Rehabilitation and upgrade of 110/220kV Gurjaani substation Gurjaani Substation
The ESIA Report is formed of a number of volumes and documents, as follows: • Volume 1 – Non Technical Summary; • Volume 2 –Project Definition – including Project introduction, need and alternatives and project description; • Volume 3 – Biodiversity: o Document 3.1 Biodiversity Project-wide assessment o Document 3.2 Biodiversity Project Component Specific assessment • Volume 4 – Social – including assessments on people, communities, the economy, cultural heritage and EMF: o Document 4.1 Social Project-wide assessment (this document); o Document 4.2 Social Project Component Specific assessment • Volume 5 – Physical Environment– including assessments on landscape and visual, noise, air quality: o Document 5.1 Physical Environment Project-wide assessment; o Document 5.2 Physical Environment Project Component Specific assessment; • Volume 6 – Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP); • Volume 7 – Land Acquisition, Resettlement and Compensation Framework; • Volume 8 – Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP): o Document 8.1 Project-wide ESMP; o Document 8.2a Transmission lines ESMP; o Document 8.2b Substations ESMP.
Page viii
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Introduction
1.11.11.1 Background This report ( Volume 4 ) presents the social impact assessment of the Georgia Electricity Transmission Network Development Project (Project). It outlines the way in which the Project has developed taking into account social features and elements and presents an assessment of the social impacts. Where impacts have been predicted, mitigation measures are presented. These mitigation measures are taken forward into the Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) for the Project ( Volume 8 ). This assessment presents the following: • Assessment of the Project’s positive impacts; • Assessment of impacts from the Project’s land acquisition or restriction on land use and related involuntary resettlement; • Assessment of potential impacts related to interaction with community infrastructures (roads, railways, airports); • Assessment of potential impact on Community Health and Safety • Assessment of potential impacts on Occupational Health and Safety; and • Assessment of potential impacts on Cultural Heritage. The results of the social impact assessment have also been used to develop a Land Acquisition Resettlement and Compensation Framework, which can be found in Volume 7 of the ESIA Report.
1.21.21.2 Structure of the Report This report (Volume 4 ) comprises two documents: Document 4.1 which provides introductory information, details of methodology and approach and the Project-wide assessment and mitigation which are relevant to each Project; and Document 4.2 which describes the Project component assessments and mitigation information. Document 4.1 (this document) is structured as follows: • Section 1.0 – Introduces the study; • Section 2.0 - delivers a Policy Framework relevant to both Georgia and the Lenders; • Section 3.0 - describes the Methodology employed for the social assessment, including Study Area, Survey Methodologies, Assessment Methodology and Assessment Limitations. • Sections 4.0, 5.0 and 6.0 – provides the Project-wide Baseline Overview, Project-wide Impact Assessment and Project-wide Mitigation respectively. These comprise an assessment of the impacts on land tenure and access to natural resources, transport infrastructure, community health and safety, occupational health and safety, and cultural heritage, that is relevant across each project component; and • Section 7.0 - presents in tabular form a Project-wide Summary of Impacts and Commitments, including assessment of potential significance without mitigation, the mitigation/commitment necessary and the significance of the residual impact. Document 4.2 comprises specific Project component information and for each Project component in turn includes: • Impact Assessment;
Page 1
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
• Mitigation; • Cumulative Assessment for each specific Project Component; and • Summary of Project Component Impacts and Commitments, again in tabular form as for Section 7.0 of the Project-wide Assessment document. Component A (in particular for the Tao line) also includes an assessment of transboundary impacts.
Page 2
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Policy Framework
This section describes the national and international legal framework, including standards and policies applicable to the Project, for the social impact assessment.
2.12.12.1 Georgian LegLegalal Framework In Georgia, the following legislative acts regulate social issues including gender equality, protection of cultural heritage and land acquisition and resettlement: • The Constitution of Georgia, 1995; • Law on Land Registration of 1996; • Law on Agricultural Land Ownership of 1996; • Law of Georgia on Payment of Substitute Land Reclamation Cost and Damages in Allocating Farm Land for Non-Farming Purposes, 1997; • The Civil Code of Georgia, 1997; • Law of Georgia on Rules for Expropriation of Ownership for Necessary Public Needs, 1999; • Law on Privatization of State-Owned Agricultural Lands of 2005; • The Law of Georgia on Protection of Cultural Heritage, 2006; • Law on Recognition of Ownership Rights on Land Plots being under the Usage of Natural Persons and Legal Persons of Private Law, 2007; and • Law on Gender Equality, 2010. For land acquisition and resettlement, the following laws have direct implications for the Project: • The Constitution of Georgia . The Constitution confirms the right of ownership, the right to own and inherit property (Article 19). However, property may be confiscated for public utility or urgent need determined by a court of decision, by way of preliminary, full and fair compensation. Agricultural lands cannot be owned by a foreigner, except under exceptional cases. Therefore, the Constitution creates a foundation for the legislative basis of possession of immovable property and recognises the right of ownership and also permits of exploitation for public needs. The Constitution also states the legal framework that guarantees public access to information, stating that an individual has the right to obtain full, unbiased, and timely information regarding their working and living environment (Article 29 , Part 1); • The Civil Code of Georgia. The civil Code of Georgia governs private civil relations, determines rights of ownership, family and neighbouring tenements and establishes inheritance rules in Georgia. Ownership rights enable the proprietor to freely manage any assets owned. The Civil Code gives the proprietor the right to alienate any assets with rights to build, usufruct or servitude ; • Law of Georgia on Rules for Expropriation of Ownership for Necessary Public Needs. The Republic of Georgia has the constitutional power to seize any property by means of expropriation for projects of imminent public necessity. The decision is made only through a Regional Court that must be preceded by a Presidential Decree justifying the imminent nature of the public necessity. The decision must include a description of the property to be expropriated and an instruction on the necessity to pay due compensation. The expropriator has to make every reasonable effort to acquire property by negotiation and is required to value the property in accordance with the fair market value before negotiations (and at its own expense). After issuance of the Presidential decree a person seeking expropriators’ right
Page 3
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
announces in the central and local printed media about the project, its scope, area coverage and a brief description of the potentially appropriable property. This law applies if GSE intends to acquire permanent rights on private land for the Project. • Law of Georgia on Payment of Substitute Land Reclamation Cost and Damages in Allocating Farm Land for Non-Farming Purposes. This law specifies requirements for compensating the government (a land replacement fee, which is fixed and variable according to location and quality of land) and affected private landowners and users for property loss, plus lost profits by the beneficiary, of an allocation of agricultural land for non-agricultural purposes. In the event that agricultural land is taken out of agricultural use, the law requires that a land replacement fee be paid to cover costs of cultivating a parcel of agricultural land of equivalent size and quality, and that the owner/user of such land be fully compensated for damages. This law applies if GSE intends to place foundations and towers on agricultural lands, and also if agricultural land or crops are damaged during construction or maintenance activities.
2.22.22.2 International conventions and treaties The following international conventions have been ratified by Georgia and are of relevance to the social impact assessment: • Paris Convention on the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (1972); • European Convention on the Protection of Archaeological Heritage (1992). The International Labour Organization (ILO) core labour conventions have all been ratified by Georgia: • C029 – Forced Labour Convention; • C087 – Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organize Convention; • C098 – Right to Organize and Collective Bargaining Convention; • C100 – Equal Remuneration Convention; • C105 – Abolition of Forced Labour Convention; • C111 – Discrimination (Employment and Occupation Convention; • C138 – Minimum Age Convention; and • C182 – Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention. 2.32.32.3 EBRD Policy Requirements and Guidelines The Project lenders for the Project are European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) and Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbrau Bankengruppe (KfW). The lenders have agreed that the Project is required to meet the international standards of the EBRD outlined in the EBRD Environmental and Social Policy (2014), the EIA Directive of the European Union (2009) and must also be in compliance with national regulations and laws. EBRD has adopted a comprehensive set of specific Performance Requirements (PR) that clients (in this case GSE) are expected to meet, covering a range of key areas. As far as social issues are concerned, the Project will need to meet a number of guidelines, regulation and policies. The PR in the 2014 Environmental and Social policy will be used as benchmarks for resettlement and social engagement.
Page 4
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
KfW’s Sustainability Guideline (2016) 1 is based on adopting the Performance Standards (PS) of the International Finance Corporation (IFC) which are very similar to the EBRD Performance Requirements. Whilst the EBRD PR are being used for this assessment, KfW does require compliance with the FAO Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Land, Fisheries and Forests (2012).
In the context of the present Volume 4 Social , the relevant PR for the Project are as follow: • PR1 Assessment and Management of Environmental and Social Impacts and Issues - It establishes the importance of integrated assessment to identify environmental and social impacts and to propose mitigation measures; • PR4 Health and Safety -It recognises the importance of avoiding or mitigating adverse health and safety impacts and issues associated with project activities on workers, project-affected communities and consumers; • PR5 Land acquisition, Involuntary Resettlement and Economic Displacement - It establishes recommendations to avoid or minimise involuntary resettlement by mitigating adverse social and economic impacts from land acquisition or restrictions on affected persons’ use of and access to land; • PR7 Indigenous People - It recognises that indigenous peoples are social groups with characteristics which are distinct from dominant groups in national societies; their status often limits their capacity to defend their rights and interests and they may be particularly vulnerable to adverse impacts. PR7 is not applicable for the Project. There are no social groups in Georgia that correspond to the PS7 and PR7 definition of “Indigenous Peoples” (see Section 4.3.1); • PR8 Cultural Heritage - It protects cultural heritage and guides clients to avoid or mitigate adverse impacts on cultural heritage during their business operations; and • PR10 Information Disclosure and Stakeholder Engagement - It recognises the importance of an open and transparent engagement between the client, its workers and local communities directly affected by the project as an essential element of good international practice (GIP).
______
1 KfW Development Bank (2016) Sustainability Guideline: Assessment of Environmental, Social and Climate Performance: Principles and Process, April 2016.
Page 5
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Methodology
3.13.13.1 Introduction This section sets out the methodology adopted for the social impact assessment including methods of baseline data collection and the approach adopted for the assessment and evaluation of impacts. As highlighted in Section 2 of this report, the ESIA and this social impact assessment has been prepared to ensure compliance with EBRD PR’s. The purpose of the social impact assessment is to identify potential social impacts so that any adverse negative consequences can be avoided, minimised or mitigated and positive impacts enhanced. The social impact assessment is based on the current Project’s status described in the Volume 2 – Project Definition . The Project has been developed to a feasibility level, i.e. to a detail considered sufficient to establish that the proposed alignments and substations are technically feasible and to allow environmental and social effects to be assessed. Final design, including precise location of towers, substations and access tracks will be undertaken once the main technical design is developed, after the appointment of contractors, and prior to construction commencing. Hence, when writing this Document 4.1 , the information necessary to assess in detail the Project impacts from the final line alignments, the number and location of towers, or detailed construction methods for the different section of the lines, was not available. As a consequence, for the purposes of this assessment, GSE has defined a Project boundary for each of the components that includes all land considered to be required for the construction and operation of the Project, on either a temporary or permanent basis. The Project area within this boundary comprises a 500m corridor for each transmission line, centred on the centreline of the current alignment, based on feasibility studies, and a 100m buffer around proposed substation locations. It is anticipated that the majority of the refinement undertaken during detailed design will be within this corridor/buffer. Where this is not the case, the detailed design of the infrastructure will be in accordance with the Management of Change procedure set out in Volume 8 – ESMP . The purpose of this is to ensure that social impacts remain as assessed, as far as possible, and the proposed mitigation measures (as set out in the ESMP) effectively minimise the social impacts of the Project as described in this ESIA. Additionally, EIA Reports prepared to meet Georgian regulations will be prepared to obtain an Environmental Decision and a Construction Permit for each component based on the detailed design information. These will ensure that any additional impacts and necessary mitigation not identified by this ESIA is identified and this will also be added later to the Project ESMP (Volume 8 ). In addition, during the construction phase, micro-siting of towers may be required to respond to detailed site factors that cannot reasonably be investigated prior to the completion of the ESIA/EIA studies. Again, this will be undertaken in accordance with the criteria set out in the ESMP (Volume 8) to ensure any impacts are avoided or mitigated.
3.23.23.2 Study Area The study area is defined as the Project area of influence, which is presented on Map 3.1. It comprises the spatial extents of the Project itself and the spatial extent to Project’s impacts that could affect social receptors. The following factors are considered when determining the study area: • The spatial extent of the Project during construction and operation phases, it is the direct footprint of the Project that comprises the substations, transmission line Right of Way, towers location and working areas, the temporary accommodation camps, and all working sites including temporary construction compounds and access tracks; • The spatial extent affected by the Project in the near-field and far-field during construction and operation, it is the Project’s zone of influence within and beyond its direct footprint where direct disturbances from the working sites could be experienced. This is estimated to correspond to the 500m
Page 6
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
corridor from the lines central alignment. Mapping of existing access tracks, which are illustrated in the Biodiversity Assessment, Volume 3 , shows that for each Project Component there are a significant number of access options within the 500m corridor. Where there are no access tracks it is still considered that any new tracks would be located within the 500m corridor; and • The Communities and Municipalities territories where indirect impacts could happen, or where Project related traffic could create some disturbances. In total, the study area includes 18 Municipalities and 97 Communities. Table 3.1 indicates the regions, municipalities and communities crossed by the Components.
Table 3.1 – Governing Areas crossed by the Project Components
Component Region Municipality or Self Communities Governing Cities A Imereti Tskaltubo Gumbra, Maghlaki Kvitiri, Mukhiani Opshkviti, Patriketi
Kutaisi Self-governing City (Banoja area in Kutaisi outskirts) Vani Amaghleba Saprasia, Dzulukhi Zeda vani Gora
Samtskhe-Javakheti Adigeni Pkhero Benara Varkhani Arali Akhaltsikhe Agara Persa Sviri Klde Eliatsminda Vale Sxvilisi Tskruti Guria Chokhatauri (Chokhatauri Municipality highlands)
B Guria Ozurgeti Naruja, Likhauri, Makvaneti, Shemokmedi, Chokhatauri Nabeghlavi Kobuleti Leghva, Kakuti C1 Samegrelo - Zemo Mestia Chuberi, Nakra, Pari, Lakhamula, Etseri, Becho, Latali, Lenjeri, Svaneti Mestia C2 Racha-Lechkhumi Lentekhi Lentekhi, Khopuri, Rtskmeluri lower Svaneti Tsageri Kveda Tsageri, Orbeli, Lailashi, Usakhelo, Ghvirishi Alapana, Tvishi Ambrolauri Tsesi, Khodikari, Sadmeli, Khvanchkara, Chrebalo, Chkvishi Oni Bari, Sori, Parakheti Tskaltubo Rioni, Opurchkheti, Tskaltubo community, Mekvena, Imereti Dghnorisa, Gumbra Tyibuli Jvarisa D Kakheti Gurjaani Gurjaani city, Chumlaqi, Akhasheni, Mukuzani, Vazisubani, Shashiani, Kalauri, Vachnadziani Telavi Self-Governing city Telavi Municipality Akura Kvemo Khodasheni Tsinandli Kisikhevi Shalauri Vardisubani Ruispiri Iqalto Akhmeta Zemo Khodasheni, Kistauri, Ozhio, Akhmeta, Zemo Alvani
Page 7
4600000 4800000 5000000 5200000 LEGEND
Component A Component B Component C1 Component C2 Component D Regions Municipalities 0 0 0
0 Municipalities affected 0 4 5 International borders
RUSSIA 0 0 0
0 Service Layer Credits: 0
2 Fichtner, Pleiades, SPOT, DigitalGlobe, 5 WorldView-2, Geo-Eye, Worldview, ESRI
TURKEY 13 RUE MARTIN LUTHER KING, SAINT MARTIN D'HERES, 0
0 GRENOBLE, 38400 GRENOBLE 0 FRANCE 0
0 AZERBAIJAN
0 ARMENIA
5 T: +33 6 23 37 14 14 WWW.SLRCONSULTING.COM
POWER GRID ENHANCEMENT PROJECT
VOLUME 4 SOCIAL
Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment
MAP 3.1 - Regions and Municipalities crossed - Project wide
Scale Date @A3 JANUARY 2019
© This drawing and its content are the copyright of SLR Consulting Consulting France SAS and may not be reproduced or amended except by prior written permission. SLR Consulting France SAS accepts no liability for any amendments made by other persons. Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
3.33.33.3 Baseline mmethodologyethodology The baseline section presents primary and secondary data collected for the Project. The methodology used to establish the social baseline followed three main steps: • Scoping meetings were first organised in all the Municipalities crossed by the Project Components to pre-identify with the Municipal authorities, and in some cases the representatives of the Communities potentially affected, the impacts likely to occur and the sensitive social receptors; • Secondary data was collected to provide quantitative information and statistics on the potentially affected Municipalities and Communities; and • Field visits were undertaken to collect qualitative data, including direct observations during walkovers along accessible sections of the 500m corridor, semi-structured interviews with local residents, and interviews with Municipal authorities.
3.3.1 Scoping meetings A series of Scoping Meetings have been held with representatives of the municipalities in areas affected by the project as outlined in Table 3.2.
Table 3.2 - Scoping meetings
Project component Date Location/Municipality
A 18 April 2018 Vani
20 April 2018 Ambrolauri
23 April 2018] Akhaltsikhe
23 April 2018 Adigeni
B 23 April 2018 Chokhatauri
23 April 2018 Ozurgeti
C1 17 April 2018 Tsalenjikha
26 June 2018 Mestia
C2 18 April 2018 Kutaisi
18 April 2018 Tskaltubo
19 April 2018 Tsageri
19 April 2018 Lentekhi
19 April 2018 Tkibuli
20 April 2018 Oni
D 26 April 2018] Telavi
26 April 2018 Gurjanni
27 April 2018 Akhmeta
Page 9
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Those invited to attend the meetings comprised relevant representatives of municipalities through which the components pass. In some cases, local representatives of the local communities were also in attendance. A detailed description of the discussions held during the scoping meetings is provided in Volume 6 – Stakeholder Engagement Plan . The key issues raised during these meetings comprised the following themes: • Requests for more details on the transmission line routes and locations of the towers; • Concerns about impacts from EMF and ensuring safe distance from housing; • Interest in the land compensation process, in particular, timing of the Project and process for registering unregistered land; • Query about changes to electricity tariffs and whether there would be local distribution improvements; • Benefits to the community – opportunities for jobs; • Query on the link between the projects and HPPs, especially in Svaneti; and • Requests for GSE to consider underground cables in places close to settlements.
3.3.2 Collection of available secondary data Publicly available secondary data from various sources were collected and analysed, including the following: • Socioeconomic data was collected from the National Statistics Office of Georgia ( www.geostat.ge ). The latest data available were used 2, and were aggregated at the Municipal or Community level whenever possible; • The latest Regional Development Strategies for each region crossed by the Project Component; • Regarding cultural heritage: o Data from the National Agency for Cultural Heritage Preservation of Georgia (NACHP) were also obtained regarding all cultural heritage elements identified and registered by NACHPO in the 500m corridor; o A review of available academic sources has also been undertaken (see the bibliography in Section 8.0); o Cultural heritage internationally recognised were identified through a web search. The UNESCO world heritage list 3 was consulted; and • Available aerial imagery obtained by GSE for the Project was also collected to inform a spatial analysis and identify the types of land use and activities conducted in the 500m corridor.
3.3.3 Qualitative data collection Based on the results of the scoping meetings, and of a preliminary analysis of available secondary data, including aerial imagery, a qualitative data collection protocol was defined. It was chosen to undertake (i) rapid survey of all the accessible section of the lines alignments, (ii) direct field observations through detailed walkover in potentially sensitive areas regarding the expected social impacts: residential areas close to the central alignments
______
2 Data is mostly from the period 2014 up to 2017.
3 https://whc.unesco.org/en/list
Page 10
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019 of the lines or areas where dense farming activities were identified in the potential Right of Way, and (iii) qualitative interviews with local authorities and local residents in the areas identified as potentially sensitive. In total, 25 detailed walkover segments were chosen to conduct the detailed field observation and the qualitative interviews with the local residents. At least one segment was studied for each municipality crossed by the Components. Each detailed walkover segment covered approximately an area of 6 kilometres. They were chosen according to three main criteria, (1) accessibility by car or by foot, (2) type of land use, (3) and lastly the presence of dwellings. The segments were chosen to be representative of all the categories of social sensibility found on each Component. The area covered by the detailed walkover and qualitative data collection is presented on Map 3.1. Direct field observation during the detailed walkover allowed to characterise the land use, and to identify and localise sensitive elements, such as dwelling or cultural heritage elements (cemeteries) located in or very close to the potential Right of Way. Qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted with local residents selected by an iterative snow-ball sampling technique. Interviews were also conducted with the representative authorities of Municipalities. Table 3.3 presents the Municipalities and Communities included in each detailed walkover segment. Maps showing the extent of the walkover section are provided for each Component in the Document 4.2 . In total, 60 interviews have been conducted. The list of formal semi-structured interviews conducted in presented in Appendix A. Informal discussions were also conducted whenever possible. These two types of interviews aimed at collecting information about local informal land tenure practices (if any), land uses and their seasonality, social organisation and means of livelihoods, women’s position, vulnerable groups and cultural heritages of local value. These interviews did not aim at achieving statistical representativeness, but rather to identify the diversity of socioeconomic situations along the Components alignments. The objective was to confirm the sensitivity criteria identified (refer to Section 3.4 of this report) through the scoping meetings and identify the existence of local peculiarities in each segment, regarding land tenure practices, economic activities, social organisation or vulnerabilities. Interviews were also conducted with the Municipal authorities concerned by the Project (except for Tyibuli Municipality in Imereti, where they were not available at the time of the fieldwork). The topics discussed were the same as those discussed with local residents. Satellite images of the areas impacted by each component were also shown to the Municipal authorities, to discuss with them the potential impacts and the areas where sensitive social receptors could be located. Following the corridor on satellite images has allowed municipal authorities to share their knowledge about the impacted areas, and to clarify the existence of potential cultural heritage element of local value within the 500m corridor. The qualitative data collection was undertaken between 7 May and 2 July 2018. Two fields study surveys were conducted: one from 7 May to 16 May, and the second one from the 11 June up to the 2 of July.
Page 11
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Table 3.3 – Municipalities and Communities included in the detailed walkover segments
Component Municipality Walkover Community segment # A Tskaltubo 1 Patriketi (KM15.5 to KM18 of the Sairme line) Vani 2 Amaghleba (KM23 to KM27.5 of the Sairme line) Adigeni 3 Adigeni Municipality highlands (KM59 to KM69 of the Sairme line) Akhaltsikhe 4 Sviri and Eliatsminda (KM86 to KM93 of the Sairme line) 5 Persa and Agara (KM95 to 102 of the Sairme line and KM3 to KM7 of the Tao line) B Ozurgeti 6 Naruja and Likhauri (KM0 to KM5 of the Guria line + Paliastomi loop)
Chokhatauri 7 Chokhatauri Municipality highlands (KM29 to KM33 of the Guria line) C1 Mestia 9 Chuberi (KM1 to KM8 of the Mestia line) 10 Etseri and Becho (KM37 to KM44 of the Mestia line) 11 Latali, Lenjeri and Mestia (KM47 to KM55 of the Mestia line) C2 Oni 12 Sori and Parakheti (KM43 to KM47 of the Oni HPP line) Ambrolauri 13 Tsesi (KM35 to KM39 of the Oni HPP line) Lenkheti 15 Rtskhmeluri and Khopuri (KM23 to KM28 of Kheledula line) Tskaltubo 16 Gumbra (KM42 to KM47 of the Lechkhumi line and KM41 to KM45 of the Derchi replacement line) 17 Opurchketi (KM30 to KM34 of the Lechkhumi line) 18 Rioni and Jvarisa (KM21 to KM31 of the Derchi replacement line) 19 Dghnorisa (KM13 to KM16 of the Derchi replacement line) Tsageri 20 Alpana (KM2-3 of Derchi line replacement and KM2-3 of Lajanuri line) D Gurjaani 21 Mukuzani (whole Mukuzani loop) 22 Vazisubani Shashiani Kalauri and Vachnadziani (KM12 to KM17 of the Gurjaani line) Telavi 23 Kvemo Khodasheni, Tsinandali and Kissiskhevi (KM24 to KM29 of the Gurjaani line + Tsinandali loop)
Telavi 24 Telavi city and Shalauri (KM31 to KM33 of Gurjaani line and KM0 to KM3 of Akhmeta line) Akhmeta 25 Akhmeta and Kistauri (KM25 to KM30 of the Akhmeta line)
Page 12
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
3.43.43.4 Impact assessment mmethodologyethodology The impact assessment accounts for all of the activities involved in the Project and describes direct, indirect and cumulative impacts on socio-economic and cultural resources during the construction, operation and maintenance phases of the Project.
3.4.1 Impact assessment As for the social baseline, the impact assessment for each line has been done in a 500m wide corridor (250m either side of the centreline). However, the study area does not cover the associated infrastructure beyond the 500m corridor, such as access tracks or construction compounds and laydown areas, that will be built to facilitate the construction of the transmission line as their locations were not known at the time of writing. Such infrastructure outside of the impact assessment corridor will be addressed by the Georgian EIA process and also by measures set out within the ESMP (Volume 8 ). The aim of this social impact assessment is to answer the following questions: • Prediction - what will happen to local communities as a consequence the Project? • Evaluation - what are the consequences of this impact? How important or significant is it and to who? • Mitigation – if it is significant, can anything be done about it? Can the mitigation hierarchy be applied? To answer these questions, the assessment is based the following steps: • Evaluation of the sensitivity of the social component (see Table 3.4); • Characterisation of the magnitude of the potential impact: o Spatial extent and distribution of the impact (local, municipal, regional, national/international); o Number of people affected; o Likelihood of occurrence; o Impact duration (short-term, medium-term, long-term), frequency and reversibility (temporary or permanent); o Stakeholders acceptability; • Evaluation of the significance of the potential impacts (negligible, low, medium or high) before any mitigation measure which is the result of the combination of the sensitivity of the receptor(s) and the magnitude of the impact, as indicated in the Impact significance matrix in Table 3.5; and • Identification of proposed control and mitigation measures to avoid, minimise, mitigate and compensate potential impacts. Each impact was assessed during both the construction and operation period as well as categorised according to the permanent or temporary nature of the impact.
Table 3.4– Assessment criteria for sensitivity of socioeconomic receptors
Receptor Very Low Sensitivity Low Sensitivity Medium Sensitivity High Sensitivity
1. Community • Very good health • Reasonable health • Poor or limited health • Very limited or health infrastructures and infrastructures and infrastructures and non-existent services services services health • Average education level infrastructures and and health practices services
Page 13
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Receptor Very Low Sensitivity Low Sensitivity Medium Sensitivity High Sensitivity • Good education • Low rate of STI and of • Poor level of education • Very poor level of level and health other transmissible and poor health education and practices diseases (vector practices very poor health • Very low rate of related, water and soil • High rate of STI and of practices Sexually related diseases) other transmissible • Very high rate of Transmitted • Average environmental diseases (vector STI and of other Infections (STI) and health conditions (e.g. related, water and soil transmissible of other average exposure to related diseases) diseases (vector transmissible potentially hazardous • poor environmental related, water and diseases (vector materials, average health conditions (e.g. soil related related, water and housing conditions) exposure to potentially diseases) soil related • Average incident and hazardous materials, • Very bad diseases) fatality rates poor housing environmental • Good • Average nutrition conditions) health conditions environmental conditions • High incident and (e.g. very high to health conditions fatality rates potentially (e.g. low exposure • Poor nutrition hazardous to potentially conditions materials, very hazardous poor housing materials, good conditions) housing • Very high incident conditions) and fatality rates • Very low incident • Food insecurity / and fatality rates malnutrition • Good nutrition conditions 2. Land tenure • One only • Several land tenure • Several land tenure • Several land recognized land systems co-exist, with systems co-exist, with a tenure systems co- tenure system one taking priority clear hierarchy in exist, without any • No or very few • Some land related practice hierarchy in land-related tensions • Land-related disputes practice tensions • Existing, often used but are frequent • High levels of land- • Existing, widely outdated cadastre or • Existing but mainly related conflicts used and up-to- land title registration unused cadastre or which are open date cadastre or system land title registration and unresolved land title • Average land pressures system • No existing registration 4 • High land pressures 4 cadastre or land system • Some limited informal • Significant informal title registration • Very low land land use, most land is land use, limited areas system pressures 4 registered and of land are registered • Very high land • No informal land acknowledged in the and acknowledged in pressures 4 use, everything is national legislation the national legislation • All (nearly all) land registered and use is informal and acknowledged in no (or very little) the national land is registered legislation and acknowledged in the national legislation
______
4 Land pressure refers to pressure from the development or planned development of land for commercial, agricultural, urban use
Page 14
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Receptor Very Low Sensitivity Low Sensitivity Medium Sensitivity High Sensitivity
3. Economic • Economic activities • Mix of economic and • Mix of economic and • Subsistence activities are dominant subsistence activities subsistence activities activities only • Livelihoods not • Only a minor part of • Major part of • Land-based based on land or livelihoods is based on livelihoods are based livelihoods, community-owned land or community- on land or community- • Complete resources owned resources owned resources, dependency on • No dependency on • Partial • Partial natural resources natural resources (minor)dependency on (major)dependency on in the affected in the affected natural resources in the natural resources in the area area affected area affected area • Very few or no • Large proportion • Average proportion of • Small number of educated or skilled of educated and educated or skilled educated or skilled workers amongst skilled workers workers amongst the workers amongst the the local amongst the local local population local population population population • Existing, although • Strong pressure on • Local resources • No pressure on minor, pressure on resources used by local are not sufficient resources used by resources used by local communities to provide means local communities communities • Some alternative of livelihoods for • Equivalent natural • Equivalent natural or natural or economic all the local or economic economic resources are resources are available population resources are available in the vicinity for the local • Equivalent natural available in the of the Project area, population, although or economic vicinity of the although at some not in sufficient resources are not Project area distance quantity and/or far available for the • Very high diversity • Fairly high diversity of away. local population of economic economic opportunities • Limited diversity of • Very limited opportunities economic opportunities diversity of economic opportunities 4. Social structures • Integrated social • Integrated social groups • Isolated social groups • Isolated social / Gender groups • Monetized economy • Economy only partially groups • Highly monetized • Local social group are monetized • Economy mostly economy used to social changes • Traditional social non-monetized • Local social group • Average proportion of structures with only • Traditional social are used to social vulnerable people and limited exposure to structures not changes groups social changes exposed to social • Low proportion of • Average proportion of • High proportion of changes vulnerable people women's participation vulnerable people and • Very high and groups in decision making, groups proportion of • High proportion of • Average proportion of • Low proportion of vulnerable people women's women in the labour women's participation and groups (more participation in market, in decision making, than 30% of the decision making, • Average proportion of • Low proportion of affected • High proportion of livelihood creation by women in the labour population) women in the women market, • Very low labour market, • Low proportion of proportion of • average livelihood creation by women's proportion of women participation in livelihood creation decision making, by women • Very low proportion of women in the labour market,
Page 15
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Receptor Very Low Sensitivity Low Sensitivity Medium Sensitivity High Sensitivity • Very low proportion of livelihood creation by women
5. Public utilities & • Close proximity to • Close to a large • Remote area • Very remote area services / a large population population centre • Density of basic public • Lack of basic public Infrastructures centre • Average density of services & utilities utilities and • High density of basic public services & insufficient for the local services public services & utilities population • Very poor quality utilities • Average quality of • Poor quality of public of public utilities • Good quality of public utilities and utilities and services, and services, public utilities and services, irregularities frequent irregularities, irregularities, services, no and shortages can shortages and shortages and shortages, happen occasionally. malfunctions malfunctions occur irregularities or on a regular basis. malfunctions. 6. Cultural heritage • Few assets • Designated or • Assets (material or • Assets protected (material or undesignated assets cultural, e.g. tangible or under national cultural, e.g. (material or cultural, not tangible) protected legislation and/or tangible or not e.g. tangible or not under national UNESCO world tangible) with very tangible) of local legislation, sites that heritage sites little or no importance are on the protected designated for surviving • Assets of limited value, monuments list their cultural archaeological but with potential to • Assets that can historic or interest (sites contribute to local contribute significantly archaeological previously heavily research objectives, e.g. to acknowledged value (including damaged or sites that have been national or regional nominated sites) destroyed) ploughed and are under research objectives • Assets (material or • Cultural sites or threat of continued • Local use of the cultural cultural, e.g. assets are not destruction by heritage assets is tangible or not legally protected ploughing strong, and is an tangible) that can and/or do not • Cultural sites or assets important social contribute have any legally recognized but feature. significantly to traditional or not protected, and/or • Other similar cultural acknowledged customary having a local heritage sites are not international protection traditional or available at a regional research • Local People do customary significance or national scale objectives not use the • Local use of the cultural • Sites can be relocated • Local social cultural heritage heritage assets is or replaced, but with identity is assets anymore, or declining, but great difficulty dependent on the this use is strongly continued. cultural heritage declining. • Other similar cultural asset. • Other similar heritage sites are not • Other similar cultural heritage available nearby, but cultural heritage sites are available similar sites can be sites are not in the vicinity found at the regional or available at an • Sites can easily be national scale international scale repaired, relocated • Sites can be relocated • Assets cannot be or replaced or replaced, although relocated or with some technical replaced. difficulties
Page 16
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Table 3.5 - Impact Significance Matrix – Sensitivity vs Magnitude Severity
Sensitivity of Receptor / Resource
Very Low Low Medium High
Magnitude of Impact Very Low Negligible Low Low Low
Low Low Low Medium Medium
Medium Low Medium Medium High
High Low Medium High High
3.4.2 Mitigation hierarchy A general mitigation hierarchy has been followed during the Project environmental and social assessment process, along with the technical feasibility study. The project tried first to avoid and reduce the impacts before having to mitigate or compensate them. The aim of the Project was to avoid or reduce as many impacts as possible through the selection of the best alignment for each Project Component. Routing studies have been conducted during the feasibility studies, to avoid as much as possible impacts on valued social components. For each Project Component, several alternative alignments were studied. For each of the alternatives considered, site visits along the Components alignment were conducted together with the E&S consultant, the Project engineers and representatives of the Project team from GSE. Each alternative was then evaluated by the social and biodiversity team. This was a comparative assessment which evaluated each alternative alongside technical requirements. The results of the alternatives analysis is presented in Chapter 2 of Volume 2 Project Definition. Where possible, the alternative selected sought to avoid or minimise as much as possible the local social impacts. For each impact of the selected route, the corresponding generic and specific mitigation measures as well as the residual impacts were identified for the construction and operation phases of the Project. Mitigation measures are necessary to negate and/or minimise negative impacts, particularly negative impact of high significance that cannot be addressed by embedded design (based on the alternative analysis and route optimisation), construction and operation measures as permanent land requirements. Mitigation measures contribute to achieving a socially acceptable project that complies with relevant national and international social performance criteria.
3.53.53.5 Data and aassessmentssessment lllimitatlimitatimitationsions The analysis presented in Document 4.1 and Document 4.2 is limited by the following factors: • At the time of writing, the definition of the Project Component available is at the feasibility level. In particular, the location of the towers and the final alignment of the lines is not yet finalised; • As a result, no household surveys have been conducted, and the socioeconomic quantitative data is based on publicly available statistics only; • The qualitative data collection conducted was designed to overcome this limitation. However, o Given the spatial extent of the study areas, it was not always possible to gather the same level of details during the extensive interviews conducted in the affected communities; o Information collected through interviews is what the interviewees declared. It might not always be accurate, up to date or true. To overcome this limitation, the information collected was triangulated by asking the same questions to the people interviewed;
Page 17
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
• During the site surveys, some segments selected based on the satellite images’ analysis were not always accessible either by car or foot. To overcome this limitation, interviews were conducted as close as possible to the inaccessible sites of interest; and • The seasonality of land use was documented through the qualitative interviews but was not checked through site visits at different times of the year. Despite these limitations, the data collected and reviewed allow for the assessment of the Project’s impacts. The present impact analysis is reliable, commensurate with the technical definition of the Project at the time of writing and provides a level of detail sufficient to design mitigation measures to avoid, minimise and mitigate these impacts. . Further socioeconomic studies will be conducted on each component as part of the Resettlement Action Plans to be prepared in compliance with the Lenders policies. These studies will include socioeconomic surveys covering all the households affected by land acquisition.
Page 18
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Project-wide Baseline Information
4.14.14.1 Introduction The purpose of this baseline section is to provide an information base against which to monitor and assess the Project’s progress and effectiveness during implementation and after completion. Given the importance and spatial extent of the Project, this section of Document 4.1 is mainly focusing on a national and/or regional scale and considers the Project as a whole. The Project Component assessment, found in Document 4.2 , presents information at a more local scale and focuses on each of the five Project’s Components. The selection of topics documented in this baseline section is based on the type of impacts generally documented for electric power transmission and distribution projects 5, and their likely receptors.
4.24.24.2 Administrative context and governance
4.2.1 Recent administrative history
At the beginning of the 19 th Century, Georgia was incorporated into the Russian Empire and then slowly emerged as an independent republic before the Red Army invasion in 1921 which established a government of workers' and peasants' soviets. Soviet Georgia was briefly incorporated into a Transcaucasian Federation which in 1922 was a founding republic of the Soviet Union. In 1936, the Transcaucasian Federation was dissolved, and Georgia emerged as a Union Republic: The Georgian Soviet Socialist Republic. During the Soviet period, Georgia was one of the wealthiest and most privileged republics; its Black Sea coast was the most popular holiday destination for the Soviet elite. In 1991, shortly before the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Supreme Council of the Republic of Georgia declared independence from the U.S.S.R. In 1991, shortly before the collapse of the Soviet Union, Georgia declared independence but was soon destabilized by a bloody coup d’état followed by ethnic and civil conflicts. In 1992, separatists took control of parts of South Ossetia and one year later most of the region of Abkhazia. Georgia began to stabilize in 1995. In August 2008, periodic outbreaks of tension and violence culminated in a five-day war with Russia, which took over 20% of Georgia’s territory. Since Independence, Georgia is a semi-presidential representative democratic republic with a multi-party system. The President of Georgia is the head of state and the Prime Minister is the head of the government. Together they wield executive power. Legislative power is vested in both the Government and the unicameral Parliament. Since 2003, Georgia has implemented an impressive array of legal and institutional reforms reflected in pronounced political, social and economic transformations. By all accounts, these reforms have been recognised to be at the roots of Georgia’s improved institutional environment. For instance, the Government has embarked on local self-governance reforms since 2006, when a new Organic Law on Local Self- Government was enacted. This Law consolidated the more than one thousand previously existing local self-governance units into 69 municipalities. The Law provided them with some autonomy vis-à-vis the central authorities, although their competencies and capacities remained limited.
______
5 A good overview of the typical impacts of transmission lines and substations can be found in the IFC (2007) “ Environmental, Health, and Safety Guidelines for Electric Power Transmission and Distribution ”
Page 19
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
4.2.2 Administrative divisions Georgia is divided into 9 regions (მხარე) and 1 city (the capital Tbilisi). The regions are in turn subdivided into Municipalities ( მუნიციპალიტეტი ). There are two types of municipalities: 12 self-governing cities ( ქალაქი, kalaki ) and 67 self-governing districts ( თემი, temi ). Both types of municipalities have boundaries, as well as representative and executive bodies of government. They also possess their own assets, budget and income. The bodies of self-government at the level of municipalities are a representative council, sakrebulo , directly elected for a four-year term, and an executive branch, gamgeoba , in a self-governing community and meria , in a self- governing city, chaired, respectively, by gamgebeli and meri (mayor), directly elected for a four-year term. The 67 Municipalities self-governing districts ( თემი, temi ) are then further divided into lower administrative units or Communities composed of one village or groups of villages or settlements. Each of these Communities elects one representative at the representative council, ( Sakrebulo) at the Municipal level. This Volume 4 will use the terms “Municipalities” to refer at the self-governing districts, “Self-governing City” to refer at the self-governing cities and “Communities” to refer at the lower-level villages or groups of settlements. The Project is crossing 6 different regions as mentioned in Table 3.1, 18 municipalities and 97 communities. They are represented on Map 3.1.
4.34.34.3 Demography From the independence of Georgia in 1991 up to 2014, the Georgian population has declined. Table 4.1 shows that in 25 years, Georgia has lost one third of its population. From 1989 up to 2014, no region has experienced a growth of its population. The most significant decrease in population compared to the 2002 population census occurred in Racha-Lechkhumi and Kvemo Svaneti and Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti, two regions crossed by the Project. Table 4.1 also shows that the decrease was more important in rural areas. In 2014, 42.8% of the population was living in rural areas compared to 47.7% in 2002. Currently, the population density of Georgia is about 56 people per km², which ranks 144th in the world. According to the last census, 1.1 million private households were recorded in the country, a 10.8% decline compared with the previous 2002 census. The average number of private household members has also decreased by 0.2 compared with the 2002 population census and amounted to 3.3 persons. According to the 2014 census, males constitute 47.7% of the Georgian population and female 52.3%. There is no significant change compared to the 2002 census. However, the population is aging. The percentage of persons aged 0-14 in the total population decreased by 2.4% compared to the 2002 census data. Further, the percentage of the population over the age of 60 increased from 18.6% according to the 2002 census to 20% in the 2014 census.
Page 20
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Table 4.1 – Georgian population by region
Region Year 1989 2002 2014 Georgia 5, 400,841 4, 371,535 3,713,804 Urban 2,991.352 2,284,796 2,122,623 Rural 2,409.489 2,086,739 1,591,181 Tbilisi 1,246,936 1,081,679 1,108,717 Urban 1,246.814 1,081.532 1,078,297 Rural 122 147 30,420 Autonomous Republic of 525,061 1,956 … Abkhazia Urban 247,543 … … Rural 277,518 1,956 … Autonomous Republic of Adjara 392,432 376,016 333,953 Urban Rural 181,289 166,398 184,744 211,143 209,618 149,179 The South Ossetian 98,527 … … Autonomous Oblast Urban 49,453 … … Rural 49,074 … … Guria 158,053 143,357 113,350 Urban 45,202 37,531 31,904 Rural 112,851 105,826 81,446 Imereti 766,892 699,666 533,906 Urban 409,178 323.792 258,510 Rural 357,714 375,874 275,396 Kakheti 441,045 407,182 318,583 Urban 100,138 84,827 71,526 Rural 340,907 322,355 247,047 Mtskheta-Mtianeti 121,791 125,443 94,573 Urban 35,360 32,144 21,259 Rural 86,431 93,299 73,314 Racha-Lechkhumi and Kvemo 59757 50,969 32,089 Svaneti Urban 12,573 9,587 6,970 Rural 47,184 41,382 25,119 Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti 424,746 466,100 330,761 Urban 170,737 183,133 129,391 Rural 254,009 282,967 201,370 Samtskhe-Javakheti 235,512 207,598 160,504 Urban 86,169 65,535 54,663 Rural 149,343 142,063 105,841 Kvemo Kartli 608,491 497,530 423,986 Urban 271,019 186,505 180,118 Rural 337,472 311,025 243,868 Shida Kartli 321,598 314,039 263,382 Urban 135,877 113,812 105,211 Rural 185,721 200,227 158,171
Page 21
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
4.3.1 Ethnicity and national minorities Georgians are considered to be a unique and polymorphous nation: Georgians created three Georgian alphabets (Asomtavruli, Nuskhuri, Mkhedruli), maintain several Kartvelian languages (Georgian, Svan, Mengrelian, Laz), and exhibit both self-identification as part of a particular sociolinguistic group and of the Georgian ethnos. Georgian people comprises many different sociolinguistic groups, some of them speaking a distinct language, such as Svans, Mingrelians and Lazes, and one of the other 18 regional Georgian dialects 6 (such as Imeretian, Rachan, Lechkhumian, Gurian, Adjarian, Javakhian, Kakhetian, or Tushetian).All these sociolinguistic groups form altogether the Georgian nation and the State. The history of Georgia goes back to several centuries before Christ (BC), with early state-like unions of several sociolinguistics groups created in VI century BC, the Colchi Kingdom and the Iberian Kingdom, with its centre in Mtskheta. The first king of Georgia united the territories of the east and west Georgia and created the first united Georgian kingdom. The creation of these early kingdoms facilitated to the formation of a consolidated Georgian nation. This consolidation was also supported by the fact that Georgian kingdoms embraced Christianity in the beginning of 4th century AC. The early Georgian kingdoms disintegrated into feudal regions during early Middle Ages. The Georgian people later formed a unified Kingdom of Georgia in the 9th-10th centuries AD. The Kingdom of Georgia reached its zenith in the 12th to early 13th centuries AD, which was followed by a rapid declination due to Mongol invasions. King George V managed to unify a disintegrated country, liberate it from almost century-long Mongol rule, and reintegrated mountains and lowlands of Georgia in the 14 th century. After King George V, Kingdom of Georgia in the 15th century AD was fragmented into three independent kingdoms and five semi-independent principalities. Georgian language remained a literature language of newly emerged kingdoms and principalities, even if some of them had their own vernacular language as well. Perception of national and cultural unity did not disappear during the domination from Iran and the Ottoman Empire or during the annexation by Russians and integration into the Russian Empire. During the Soviet period, the different Georgian sociolinguistic groups maintained their local identities as well as their attachment to their Georgian identity. National minorities Nowadays, while there is no official administrative definition of “ethnic minorities” in Georgia, there are some “national minorities” recognised by the administrative census. According to the Resolution of the Parliament of Georgia on Resolution of the Council of Europe’s Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities 7 adopted in October 2005, a national minority is defined as a group, the members of which a) are Georgian citizens; b) differ from the dominant part of the population in terms of language, culture and ethnic identity; c) have been living in the territory of Georgia for a long time; and d) live in compact settlements in the Georgian territory. The following groups are defined as national minorities:8 Azeris, Armenians, Russians, Yezidis, Kurds, Greeks, Kists, Ukrainians, Assyrians, and Jews. Based on the results of the 2014 General Population Census, 86.8% of the population are ethnic Georgians but the largest ethnic minorities are Azerbaijanis with 233,000 (6.3 per cent) and Armenians 168,100 (4.5 per cent). Other ethnic groups include Russians with 26,500 (0.7 per cent), Yezidis 12,200 (0.3 per cent), Greeks 5,500 (0.1
______
6 See for example Gigineishvili, Topuria, and K'avtaradze (1961), cited in Kevin Tuite (1987). "The geography of Georgian q'e"
7 Georgia on Resolution of the Council of Europe’s Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, #1938-IIs, 13 October 2005
8 Wheatley, J. (2006). Implementing the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities in Georgia: A Feasibility Study. ECMI Working paper #28.
Page 22
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019 per cent), Kists 5,700 (0.2 per cent), Assyrians 2,400 (0.1 per cent), Ukrainians 6,000 (0.2 per cent) as well as small Jewish and Polish communities. The EBRD PR7 or other International Lenders policies on “Indigenous Peoples” have not been triggered in Georgia. The term “Indigenous Peoples” is used by these policies in a technical sense to refer to a social and cultural group, distinct from dominant groups within national societies. None of the Georgian sociolinguistic groups or the national minorities possess the characteristics defining “Indigenous Peoples”.
4.3.2 Religion Georgia contains a variety of religious minority communities, including Muslims, various non-Orthodox Christian denominations and other faith groups. According to the 2014 census, 83.4% of the Georgian population identified themselves as Eastern Orthodox Christian, 10.7% Muslim, 3.9% Armenian Apostolic, and 0.5% Catholic. Orthodox churches serving other non-Georgian ethnic groups, such as Russians and Greeks, are subordinate to the Georgian Orthodox Church.
4.44.44.4 Vulnerable groups As defined in the Lenders E&S policies; “ ‘vulnerable groups’ refers to people who, by virtue of gender identity, sexual orientation, religion, ethnicity, indigenous status, age, disability, economic disadvantage or social status may be more adversely affected by project impacts than others and who may be limited in their ability to claim or take advantage of project benefits. Vulnerable individuals and/or groups may also include, but not be limited to, people living below the poverty line, the landless, the elderly, women and children-headed households, refugees, internally displaced people, ethnic minorities, natural resource dependent communities or other displaced persons who may not be protected through national legislation and/or international law .”9 During the social baseline, the vulnerable groups and vulnerability criteria used to define those groups have been discussed with the local community and the municipal authorities through qualitative semi-structured interviews. The results of the interviews show that most of the vulnerability criteria used to define vulnerable groups are connected to age, economic disadvantage and internal displacement. These criteria allow a relevant assessment of vulnerability. A large part of the population is aging, and, therefore, heavily dependent on pensions. Women can get a retirement pension at the age of 60 and men at the age of 65. Currently the old age retirement pension is set at 180 GEL per month for each person, regardless of the income or the type of job people used to have in the past. Regarding the economic situation, the local industries that existed during the Soviet period have closed, and the levels of employment and economic development in most of the area are low, especially within mountains regions. As far as women are concerned, none of the male or female interviewers have described women as vulnerable persons. During the field visits, interviews conducted with residents did not reveal significant disparities between men and women. However, this observation should be interpreted with caution since interviews were short, and each interviewee was questioned only one time. The elderly The elderly people and people living below the poverty line are both helped financially by the government. The state pension for elderly people is a monthly state disbursement of 180 GEL per month (approx. 60 €), regardless of working years, paid taxes or other factors. Within some Communities where the climate and the topography make peoples’ living conditions harder, the pension is 216 GEL per month. The extended family model also contributes to protect elderly people as in Georgia a family commonly includes grandparents, aunts and uncles. However, this model is slowly declining. According to interviews, the extended family model was built on respect for elders but also on financial matters. It was a social mechanism to prevent the economically ruinous division of family property but also a survival strategy to face economic difficulties in an agricultural society. On top on ______
9 EBRD PR1 §18 (footnote #7)
Page 23
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019 those economic reasons, it was a sign of respect for the elders. Nowadays, the decline of the Georgian agricultural society leads to the population decrease in rural areas. In all the communities crossed by the Project, unemployment is one of the biggest problems faced by the working class, which must move to the capital or abroad if they are to find a job. The slow decline of the extended family model does not prevent the younger generations from looking after the older ones by regularly sending money. The retired interviewers have argued that they are helped by their children. Internally Displaced People (IDP) The Georgian government recognises Internally Displaced Persons (IDP) status for individuals who fled from the regions of Abkhazia and Ossetia because of the conflicts in the 1990s and the 2000s. Their resettlement in other regions do not appear at first problematic. Interviews conducted with municipality officials and ordinary people have all mentioned special state programmes to help them acquire land to farm as well as social allowances. Some respondents personally knew families of displaced persons who were forced to leave their region because of the conflicts related to the two separatist regions - Abkhazia and South Ossetia - and they all insisted on the good integration of these people within the communities. However, recent official reports from the Public Defender of Georgia do not back up this evaluation. Despite certain progress and some improvements regarding IDPs’ human rights, the main problem for most of them is still miserable living conditions and lack of living space (Public Defender of Georgia , 2015 10 ). In 2014, there were in total 259,247 IDPs in Georgia representing 86,283 families. Figure 4.1 shows the number of IDPs registered by region in Georgia.
Figure 4.1 – Number of registered IDPs by region in Georgia (2014) Source: Public Defender of Georgia , 2015
______
10 http://mra.gov.ge/eng/static/55
Page 24
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Economically disadvantaged people People living in mountains could also be considered as economically disadvantaged people as those places are often deserted or barely inhabited. Because of population decrease, there are no jobs available for the working class and the steep slopes of the mountains do not make agricultural or livestock farming activities easy. The new law on the Development of Mountainous Regions has two objectives, (i) to reduce poverty for people living in the highlands of Georgia, (ii) and give support to economic and social development undertaken in highlands. Some of the social and economic advantages of the law for people living in mountain regions are exemption from property tax for any land they own, and a non-taxable income if their salary is 6000 GEL or lower, a 20 percent higher pension and social assistance. The law will also encourage people to live and work in the country’s mountainous regions by offering greater support to those who did so. For instance, individuals and legal entities will be exempted from income tax for 10 years. According to article 2 of the new law on the Development of Mountainous Regions, the Georgia government consider a settlement as being mountainous when it is located at approximately 1,500m or higher above sea level. However, different criteria as steepness of mountain slope or climate condition and scarcity of agricultural lands can grant the status of high mountainous settlement to a settlement located at 800m and below. Interviews conducted with people who do benefit from that law highlighted the fact that mountains regions are first deserted, leading to a poor economy, but also more constraining for both agriculture and livestock farming, especially when they are covered by forests.
4.54.54.5 Georgian Economy For much of the 20th century, Georgia's economy was within the Soviet model of command economy. After independence, Georgia started a major structural reform designed to establish a free market economy. Like other post-Soviet states, Georgia faced severe economic crises, aggravated by the conflicts in South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Between 1990 and 1994, the nation’s GDP declined by more than 70%. The late 1990s saw some signs of economic growth, which were wiped out by the 1998-1999 Russian financial crisis. In the face of widespread corruption, financial mismanagement and an economy that was on the verge of collapse, public hostility increased toward the Government. Public hostility boiled over into the 2003 Rose Revolution. The post-revolutionary Government, chaired by President Mikheil Saakashvili, promised a program of widespread legal reform – including privatising state property, stabilising the economy, reducing regulation and wiping out corruption. His Government implemented broad and comprehensive reforms that touched every aspect of the country’s life. Economic reforms were addressed to liberalisation of the economy and provision of sustainable economic growth, based on the private sector development. The new Government has achieved significant improvements in combating corruption, as well as rehabilitating infrastructure tax administration and the business environment that have led to better economic performance. Georgia was soon one of the fastest growing economies in Eastern Europe. Based on the economic reforms, the Georgian economy has diversified showing an upward tendency with average 10% of annual GDP real growth between 2004 and 2007 and reached the highest level – 12.3 % in 2007. In 2017, Georgia’s economic growth was around 4.8% (World Bank, 2017:14). Agriculture and related industries employ over half of the workforce and contributes to 9.6% to Georgia’s GDP in 2017. Currently, about 55% of the total labour force is employed in agriculture, though much of this is subsistence farming. As detailed in Document 4.2 all the regions crossed by the Project are still agrarian societies. In recent years, the Georgian government, international donors, non-governmental organisations and private investors have shifted their attention to the agricultural sector and rural economy. This represents an important turning point, especially considering that nearly half of the population in Georgia resides in rural areas and that most ‘jobs’ in the country are registered as being in the agricultural sector. Currently, more than 40% (more than 3 million hectares) of Georgia's territory is designated as agricultural land, including pastures and meadows, and 43% of this area is covered with forests. The main agricultural products
Page 25
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019 are cereals, early and late vegetables, technical crops, subtropical crops, fruit varieties, melons and gourds, tobacco and wine grapes, as well as rice, tea and livestock. Georgia is also one of the oldest wine producing regions of the world 11 . The industrial sector is, however, less developed and includes mainly food processing - which is in full expansion- as well as manufacturing of transport equipment, electric motors, iron, steel, aircraft, chemical products and textiles. The industrial and mining sectors contribute 23.4% to the GDP but employ only 8.9% of the workforce. Mineral mining includes manganese (mostly in the Chiatura and Imereti region), copper, tungsten, marble and oil. Lastly, services are the most dynamic sector, particularly hotels, restaurants, transport and telecommunications, as it contributes to 66.2% of GDP and employs 35.5% of the workforce. For instance, several beach resorts and spas that attract large numbers of tourists can be found along the Black Sea. Tourism is one of the Government's priorities, with the development of infrastructure in the coastal area of Adjara and ski stations in Svaneti.
4.64.64.6 Social organisation and women’s position
4.6.1 Social organisation at family level The interviews conducted have first reveal that the social organisation at family level is mostly based on an extended family rather than a nuclear one, with the nuclear family being composed of the grandparents, aunts, uncles, and even cousins. On average, women have 2-3 children and 4-5 in remote areas such as the mountains. Grandparents take care of their grandchildren when men and women leave their house to work abroad. Georgia's high unemployment rate forces many families to leave the country to find a job in Turkey, Italy or Greece. Qualitative interviews have confirmed that all municipalities crossing the Project are faced with this emigration problem. Most of the time, women are the ones leaving their family to work abroad. Therefore, the extended family model tends to disappear for the financial reasons previously identified.
4.6.2 Women’s accession to resource and ownership The interviews conducted did not highlight any significant differences between women and men regarding access to resources and ownership. As mentioned previously, patriarchal old traditions still exists in remote areas. Residency is patrilocal: a man inherits his father's property (including land and family home) and then passes it on to his son who would be responsible for looking after his parents; while daughters leave their family home to join their husband’s family. A father may, upon his death, provide a small plot to any female children, however, these plots are usually smaller than those provided to his sons. Traditionally, should a man die without sons, his property was inherited by his brother’s or father’s brother’s family. Women may traditionally inherit property, but it is less common as they usually go live with their husband’s family. She would then inherit her husband’s property as a widow, which will pass upon her death to her children, the eldest male if there is a son or an unmarried daughter if there is not. Unmarried adult daughters usually live with their parents, as do married brothers. However, both men and women interviewees suggested that nothing forbids women from owning or inheriting land. According to the interviews conducted, a woman will usually farm and manage the land of her husband. However, there are no customary rules forbidding women owning, leasing or inheriting land as single or married. By state law, women and men are equal regarding accession to resources and ownership. Married women are by law co-owner of their husband’s property if the asset has been acquired while married. In most regions, since the agrarian land reform of the 1990s, the residential or cultivated land was registered after the fall of Soviet System, with the norm being to draw up property deeds in the name of the husband. For ______11 Wine production is further developed in Document 4.2 for Component C2 and D.
Page 26
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019 women, it was only where a woman headed the household that she would be given title deeds in her own name. On these property deeds are written the name of the owner (the head of household) and sometimes his sons, considered as users at the time of writing the deed. At this stage, the designation of one or the other as heir is not specified. Thus, officially, wives do not appear as owners and not systematically as users. After the husband's death, procedures for updating the property deed are rarely undertaken; as the procedures are found to be complicated and unnecessary. As a direct result, many women in the study area depend on land that they do not own. However, for the interviewees, despite this lack of administrative recognition for them as users, they do not consider that they are excluded from decision-making over the land they inhabit and use. The interviewees, both men and women, indicated that they are not aware of any case of land being sold to the detriment of a mother or wife.
4.6.3 Gendered activities and employment There is no significant gendered differentiation of productive tasks. For instance, jobs in the public sector are performed by both men and women and as far as agriculture is concerned, there is no specific task performed by women except the ones which require physical strength. However, the interviews have confirmed that domestic tasks are done by women, a social pattern that currently seems not to be challenged. As mentioned previously, it is common for women to be absent from the home to undertake waged employment abroad. According to both men and women interviewees, women are more likely to find unskilled jobs (e.g. housekeepers, nannies, or in factories), while men continue farming on the family land.
4.74.74.7 Community Health and Safety Healthcare in Georgia is provided by a universal health care system under which the state funds medical treatment in a mainly privatised system of medical facilities. This system was implemented in 2013 and represents a radical change of direction in health financing policy as the Georgian government embraced the move towards universal health coverage. With the implementation of the new State program “Health for All” the government gave a health care guarantee with the aim to ensure the basic needs of all population groups irrespective of economic status. In 2013, the enactment of a universal health care program has moved Georgia closer to European norms and triggered universal coverage of government-sponsored medical care of the population and improving access to health care services. The main achievements of the Universal Health Care Program are (i) an increased access to medical services, (ii) an increased use of medical services, (iii) and a reduction of financial barriers and expansion of coverage. The HIV epidemic remains a significant public health concern in Georgia. Since the detection of the first case of HIV in 1989, the rate of new HIV diagnoses in the country has been increasing steadily and reached 12.7 per 100,000 in 2012 (UNAIDS 2018). The estimated prevalence rate at a national level for adults aged 15 to 49 is 0.4‰ (UNAIDS 2018). The latest available evidence indicates that the HIV epidemic in Georgia is largely concentrated among key affected populations (such as people who inject drugs and sex workers). Despite this, there is a high potential for the rapid spread of the HIV epidemic and the low prevalence is actually a factor in the low level of awareness about the disease among the Georgian population. Stigma against, and fear of discrimination among, people living with HIV has led many to conceal their HIV-positive status (Stvilia & alii 2005). Some studies shown that the prevalence values are underestimated, and that the registered numbers of HIV/AIDS cases in the country do not reflect the actual spread of the infection (Kvitsinadze & alii , 2010).
4.7.1 Potential receptors The sensitive areas for community health and safety are areas where potential receptors would be located. These areas consist in places where people are residing and working close to the Project construction activities or operation. These sensitive areas have been mapped using available aerial imagery and the findings of the
Page 27
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019 walkover along the Project Component alignments. All dwellings, structures or settlements located inside a 500m corridor from the Project Component alignments have been mapped. Maps and analysis are provided for each component in the Project Components assessment ( Document 4.2 ). For the Project as a whole, Table 4.2 indicates the percentage of land that is regarded as a sensitive area in each corridor. Calculated percentages are only an order of magnitude to express an approximate idea of the importance of the potential sensitive areas located near the planned OHL with regards to the whole Project. In total, the percentage of potential sensitive area could be estimated at less than 20% within the 500m corridor. As Table 4.2 shows, around 4% of this corridor is located in densely populated urban areas. Most of the sensitive areas for Community health and safety are rural areas sparsely populated. This is the result of the mitigation hierarchy adopted by the Project, which has avoided or minimised as much as possible the impacts by selecting the most suitable E&S alternative. The alternative analysis and the routing exercise undertaken as part of the feasibility study and the E&S assessment (refer to chapter 2 of Volume 2) , as well as further optimisation of the OHL alignment for the alternative selected (see Section 3.4.2) have helped to avoid as much as possible the populated areas. As shown in Table 4.3, in total, 93 sensitive areas have been identified for component A, B, C1, C2 and D. Thirteen sensitive areas are located in urban areas moderately populated, and 80 in rural areas.
Table 4.2 – Percentage of potential sensitive area
Component Area of Rural sensitive area Urban sensitive area Total sensitive area the 500m ha % ha % ha % corridor A 6,821 ha 824ha 12.08% 270ha 3,9% 1094ha 16% B 2,208 ha 453ha 20.5% 0ha 0,0% 453ha 20.5% C1 2,712 ha 413ha 15.2% 0ha 0,0% 413ha 15.2% C2 8,423 ha 828ha 9.8% 258ha 3.1% 1086ha 12.9% D 3,599 ha 816ha 22.6% 453ha 12.6% 1269ha 35.2% Total 23,763 ha 3,334ha 14.03% 981ha 4.12% 4,315ha 18.15%
Table 4.3 – Number of urban and rural sensitive area in each component
Component Number of rural sensitive area Number of urban sensitive area A 23 4 B 12 0 C1 14 0 C2 20 3 D 11 6 Total 80 13
Page 28
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
4.84.84.8 Land tenure and access to natural resources
4.8.1 Overview of land management and administration system in Georgia Up to the collapse of the Soviet Union, land in Georgia was state property with few informal private properties, and agricultural production was concentrated into large-scale collective farms. Land and means of production belonged to the state and workers had a non-transferable right of usage over a land and a flat they did not own. If cooperative agricultural enterprises did exist between workers, it did not give them any ownership rights over land but only over means of production like cattle or equipment. At the independence of Georgia in 1992, the state undertook an agrarian land reform to increase food production and develop the economy. From 1992 up to 1998, the government conducted an impressive land individualisation process composed of two different mechanisms: privatization and leasing. First, small parcels of land were distributed in full private ownership and free of charge (up to 1.25 hectares in lowlands and up to 5 hectares in highlands) to rural families. On average, small family farms cultivate 0.75 hectares of land. Second, there are larger individual farms that lease land and cultivate 6 hectares on average. However, despite this intense land privatisation program, half of the agricultural land in Georgia remains under the control of state (Gogodze J., Kan I., Kimhi A., 2007). For instance, highlands were not allocated to people. It remains state land, but it can be used freely as grazing land. The decision to implement a land individualisation reform was substantially influenced by the important role household plots played in Georgia throughout the Soviet period. In Georgia, private farming and household plots held the highest share of production in the whole Soviet Union, whereas at the same time they only cultivated 6.3% of the agricultural land (Heidhues F. & Bruntrup M., 2003). From 1992, privatisation did take place, but land titles were not registered systematically. The state authorities distributed certificates to citizens as the land registration procedure at the cadastral level was not functioning at first. The result is that, depending on the region and municipality, some families still do not have title deeds but only certificates as proof of ownership. As far as residential land is concerned, the Civil Code which became effective on 25 November 1997 declared that non-agricultural land parcels under individual houses and apartment buildings are under private ownership. Nowadays, it is estimated that 95% or more of the Georgian housing stock is currently in private hands. During the second stage of privatisation, which began in 2005 and continued to 2011, the state allowed leaseholders to buy the agricultural land that they had been occupying – through a lease purchase contract for a price that equalled ten times the land tax. The purchase price of the land could be paid in instalments over a 10-year period; leaseholders that could cover the cost within a month received a 50% reduction in the price. In 2007, Parliament passed a law regulating the management of condominiums and recognising the tenants’ common ownership of the land under their building. Land under enterprises was sold to private owners for a set price. In 2004, as part of the Government’s institutional reform strategy, the functions of land management (land use planning, monitoring, and alienation of land) and Land Administration (cadaster and registration of rights) were separated. The National Public Registry was created to handle administration, and the management function is now administered by the Ministry of Environmental Protection and Agriculture. However, privatisation has not been implemented uniformly throughout Georgia. As a result, some places are characterised by a legal pluralism where formal state law and customary land practices intermingle. This is particularly the case in the Svaneti region but also on the public highlands of Adigeni municipality located within the Samtskhe-Javakheti region. After the land distribution and still nowadays for most rural households cultivating their land has become essential for survival due to the lack of other employment opportunities in many places.
Page 29
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
4.8.2 Access to resources With regard to use of forest areas and access rights; commercial exploitation of timber is regulated by State law. Logging is only authorised under a licence issued by the National Forestry Agency. Taking wood for household use is also regulated by a permit. Each household is authorised to consume 8m 3 of firewood per year. Within each community, a ranger provides permits and controls the amount of wood collected. According to the interviews conducted, this regulation system is well respected by the communities.
4.94.94.9 Transport iinfrastructuresnfrastructures
4.9.1 Road network The road network in Georgia consists of 1,603km of highways, 5,298km of secondary roads and 13,426km of local roads 12 . Most local roads are unpaved roads. Figure 4.2 shows the national road network in Georgia. Highways and national roads are essential to the economic activities and they are considered as sensitive receptors. Local roads are used by fewer drivers than highways and national roads, but they are also essential to the economic activities of the local population. The public road network is considered highly sensitive in remote areas, where very few roads exists and are in poor condition, and where it is necessary to drive long distance to access scarce public services and utilities (schools, medical facilities or administrative centres). This is, for example, the case in mountainous areas like Mestia Municipality, where there is only one road that links the administrative centre to the rest of Georgia. The public road network will have a low to very low sensitivity in areas close to large urban centres, where the road network is much denser, and where public services and utilities are more widespread and more easily accessible. This analysis is detailed for the length of each Project Component in Document 4.2, but in summary: • For Component A, the road network sensitivity will vary from very low sensitivity at the northern end of the Sairme line in Kutaisi, to medium sensitivity near Akhaltsikhe in the southern part; • For Component B, the road network sensitivity will vary from high at the eastern end of the Guria line, and in the valleys crossed in the middle of the Guria line, to low at the western end near Ozurgeti; • For Component C1, the road network is considered highly sensitive; • For Component C2, the road network sensitivity is considered very low at the southern end of the Lechkhumi line near Kutaisi, to medium near the Kheledula and Oni lines; • Component D, the Road network sensitivity is considered low.
______12https://ec.europa.eu/transport/sites/transport/files/themes/international/european_neighbourhood_policy/european_eastern_partnership/doc/tent h-eastern-partnership-transport-panel/georgia_road_sector_overview.pdf
Page 30
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Figure 4.2 – National road network 13
4.9.2 Airports Georgia has three international airports: Tbilisi, Batumi and Kutaisi International Airports. Shota Rustaveli Tbilisi airport is the main international airport in Georgia, located 17km southeast of Tbilisi. In 2017, passenger traffic was estimated at 3,164,139 passengers 14 . Alexander Kartveli Batumi international airport is the second largest international airport in Georgia, located 2km of Batumi. In 2017, passenger traffic was estimated at 495,668 passengers. David the Builder Kutaisi International airport is the third international airport in Georgia, located 14km West from Kutaisi. In 2017, passenger traffic was estimated at 405,173 passengers. Smaller national airports in Georgia are located in Mestia, Ambrolauri, Natakhtari, Telavi, Sighnaghi and Mukhrani. Among these national airports, Mestia is the biggest one with 7,256 passengers in 2017. Ambrolauri comes at second with 1,723 passengers. Seven other smaller regional airports, airfields or air bases exist. Six of these airports are located within 10km from the Project lines: • Kutaisi International airport is about 9km south-west of the centre of Sairme line (Component A); • Ozurgeti Military Air Base in Meria airport is approximately 9km north west of the western end of the Guria line (Component B); • Mestia airport is 1km north from the far north eastern end of the Mestia line (Component C1); • Ambrolauri airport is 2km south of the Oni line (Component C2); • Tsageri airfield is located 6km south of the Kheledula line (Component C2); and • Telavi airport is 3km north of the Akhmeta line (Component D).
______
13 By Kotola001 - Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=57516576
14 http://gcaa.ge/eng/regular.php
Page 31
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
4.9.3 Railway There are 1,612km of railways in Georgia. Broad gauge accounts for 1,575km and narrow-gauge accounts for 37km. All of the railways are electrified. Figure 4.3 shows the Georgian railway network. Only the Sairme line of Component A crosses a railway. At its northern end, two railways are crossed: one between Tskaltubo and Kutaisi, and one south of Kutaisi, between Kutaisi and Samtredi. The Tao line in the south of Component A is between 1 and 5km away from the railway between Sakuneti and Vale. The lines of Component D are almost parallel to a railway and located from 1 to 3 km from it from Gurjaani to Telavi, with the Mukuzani loop crossing the railway. The southern ends of Lechkhumi line and Derchi line replacement in Component C1 come to about 1km from a railway in Kutaisi, without crossing it. Components B and C2 are in mountainous areas where there is no railway. The sensitivity of the railways depends on the economic importance of the train traffic: • The railway crossed to the south of Kutaisi is considered to have a medium to high sensitivity, as it connects the western part of Georgia with the Tbilisi and the rest of the national railway network; and • The railway crossed by the Mukuzani loop on component D is considered of negligible to low sensitivity, as it is not used regularly and the Mukuzani station is abandoned.
Figure 4.3 – Georgian railway network 15
4.10 Cultural Heritage Georgia is an old civilisation with an ancient and rich original culture. Following EBRD Performance Requirement (PR) 8, both tangible (physical) and intangible cultural heritage must be identified as they are an integral part of the continuity of cultural identity and practices. The Lender’s policy defines cultural heritage as a group of resources inherited from the past which people identify, independently of ownership, as a reflection and expression of their evolving values, beliefs, knowledge and traditions. It encompasses tangible and intangible ______
15 Source: Giorgi Balakhadze at Wikimedia Foundation, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=50440823
Page 32
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019 cultural heritage, which is recognised at the local, regional or national level, or within the international community.
4.10.1 Tangible Cultural heritage The following categories of material cultural heritage elements have been considered: • Elements of international or national interest: o World Heritage Sites either designated by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) or inscribed on the World Heritage Sites tentative list; o Monuments recognised as National Cultural Heritage sites by National Agency for Cultural Heritage Preservation of Georgia (NACHP); o Protected Natural landscapes registered by the APA; • Elements of regional or local interest: o Element of cultural heritage recognized by the NACHP with 3 categories: . (i) element recognised but not classified, including archaeological elements; . (ii) elements classified as immovable cultural heritage; and . (iii) elements classified as immovable cultural heritage of national importance; and o Local sites of interest or cultural value for the local communities. Tangible Cultural and Natural Heritage of national and international interest In Georgia, 3 sites are designated as World Heritage Sites (WHS) by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), and 15 sites have been inscribed on the WHS tentative list in 200716 . World Heritage classification leads to the definition of buffer zones where activities are extremely restricted. These protection area and restrictions are defined in a Management Plan disclosed on the UNESCO website. • Historical monuments of Mtskheta: Based on the respective legal acts of the National Legislation of Georgia enforced in 1940 and 1957, Mtskheta and its surroundings were granted the status of Archaeological-Architectural Reserve in 1977. Mtskheta was defined as a town-museum and a plan for its development was approved in 1973. The system of cultural heritage protection zones was enforced in 2006 and regularly amended to improve the management mechanism. Minor boundary modification has been defined in 2017 17 . • Management of Gelati Monastery: The Management Plan covers the Gelati Monastery, as well as the Buffer Zone of the property as defined by the Ministerial Decree #03/5 09.01.2014 and proposed in the draft Major Boundary Modification Document for the Gelati Monastery and Bagrati Cathedral World Heritage site submitted by the State Party to the World Heritage Centre in February 2014. The Gelati Monastery WHS is located in West Georgia, 11km north-east from the city of Kutaisi 18 .
______
16 http://whc.unesco.org/en/statesparties/ge The last tentative list dates from 2007, States Parties are encouraged by UNESCO to re-examine and re-submit their tentative list at least every ten years; to date no updated tentative list has been published.
17 Historical monuments of Mtskheta: http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/708/multiple=1&unique_number=2251
18 Management plan for the WHS Gelati Monastery, whc.unesco.org/document/157524
Page 33
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
• Management of the Upper Svaneti: The property has been designated as Ushguli-Chazhashi Museum Reserve since 1971. In the Soviet period the boundaries of the Strict Protection and Protection Zones were also defined. Due to several changes of cultural heritage legislation in the last 20 years, the boundaries of the protected landscape have changed. Currently the landscape is protected within 1km radius around Chazhashi village, the component of the World Heritage property, as well as within 500 m around national monuments. This zone represents the legally protected buffer zone of the property with strict limitations for development activities. The elements conveying the Outstanding Universal Value of Upper Svaneti are included within the boundaries of the property and its buffer zone 19 The National Agency for Cultural Heritage Preservation of Georgia (NACHP) has established a list of monuments recognised as National Cultural Heritage sites 20 . In 1992, UNESCO’s World Heritage Convention became the first international legal instrument to recognise and protect cultural landscapes. Following the UNESCO terminology, the term "cultural landscape" embraces a diversity of manifestations of the interaction between humankind and its natural environment. To date, there are no Cultural Landscapes designated within Georgia. However, the Georgian Agency of Protected Area (APA) lists two national protected landscapes: Kintrishi Protected Landscape (12km south of Component B), and Tusheti Protected Landscape (45km north of Component D). Table 4.4 and
______
19 Description and maps of Upper Svaneti WHS : https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/709/multiple=1&unique_number=839
20 https://heritagesites.ge/en
Page 34
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Table 4.5 list the cultural heritage sites of international and national interest with an indication of its distance to the nearest Project component. The Map 4.1, page 38, shows the location of the Project components in relation with WHS, sites registered by the NACHP, and Protected Natural landscapes registered by the APA. None of these sites are located in proximity to the Project. The closest site is located 7km away from the Project (Gelati Monastery near Kutaisi)
Page 35
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Table 4.4 – UNESCO WHS and candidate WHS in Georgia
Site Region Distance from nearest project component
UNESCO World Heritage Site (WHS)
Gelati Monastery, listed in 1994 Imereti 7km from Component C1
Upper Svaneti, listed in 1996 Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti 25km from Component C2
Historical monuments of Mtskheta, listed in Mtskheta-Mtianeti 60km from Component D 1994
UNESCO World Heritage Site tentative list
Alaverdi Cathedral Kakheti 7km from Component D
Kvetera church Kakheti Region 10km from Component D
Gremi Church of archangels and Royal Tower Kakheti Region 20km from Component D
Ananuri Fortress Mtskheta-Mtianeti Region 60km from Component D
David Gareji Monasteries and Hermitage Kakheti 65km from Component D
Mta-Tusheti Kakheti Region 65km from Component D
Tbilisi Historic district Cartili 70km from Component D
Shatili Khevsureti 90km from Component D
Samtavisi Cathedral Shida Kartli 90km from Component D
Umplitskhe Cave town Shida Kartli 110km from Component D
Dmanisi Hominid Archaeological Site Kvemo Kartili Region 140km from Component D
Vani Imereti 50km from Component C1
Colchis Wetlands and Forests Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti 90km from Component C1
Vardzia-Khertvisi Samtskhe-Javakheti 95km from Component C1
Nikortsminda Cathedral Racha-Lechkhumi and Kvemo- 15km from Component C2 Svaneti
Page 36
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Table 4.5 – NACHP National monuments
Site Region Nearest project component
Archaeological Museum-Reserve of Guria Guria 3km from Component B
Kutaisi Historical-Architectural Museum- Imereti 7km from Component C1 Reserve (monuments in and around Kutaisi, including the UNESCO World Heritage site, Gelati monastery).
Vardzia Historical-Architectural Museum- Samtskhe-Javakheti 18km from Component A Reserve
Borjomi Local History Museum Samtskhe-Javakheti 25km from Component A
Nokalakevi Architectural-Archaeological Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti 36km from Component C1 Museum-Reserve
Greater Liakhvi River South Ossetia 85km from Component C1
Petra-Tsikhisdziri Archaeological- Adjara 20km from Component B Architectural Museum-Reserve
Kldekari Historical-Architectural Museum- Shida Kartli. 85km from Component A Reserve
Gonio-Apsaros Archaeological-Architectural Autonomous Republic of Adjara 45km from Component B Museum-Reserve
Niko Pirosmanashvili State Museum Kakheti 30km from Component D
Greater Mtskheta Archaeological Museum- Mtskheta-Mtianeti 50 km from Component D Reserve
Ksani Valley Historical-Architectural Museum- Mtskheta-Mtianeti 75km from Component D Reserve
Umplitskhe Cave town Shida Kartli 85km from Component D
Stepantsminda History Museum Mtskheta-Mtianeti 80km from Component D
Page 37
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Map 4.1 – World and national interest cultural sites
Updated PDF map will replace this page in the final report
Page 38
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Cultural heritage of archaeological interest, recognised by the NACHP or of local interest None of the planned Project Components goes through a cultural and natural site registered at world or national level. However, some are close to cultural sites of local interest, or which are identified by NACHP as archaeological or cultural heritage elements. This section presents the types of sites that may be considered as having cultural local value within a 5km buffer zone around the Project Component alignments. Details and location of each site are presented in the Project Component assessments, Document 4.2 . Data on sites of local cultural value were obtained through walkover surveys (May-June 2018), consultation with NACHP, and review of bibliographic sources. These surveys revealed numerous sites, some with religious function (churches, monasteries, cemeteries) and / or historical and archaeological value (ruined complex, fortress, ancient settlement, archaeological artefacts). The oldest cultural layer belongs to the middle Bronze Age, but frequent archaeological findings that cover a wide range of time periods show that the country was continuously occupied since ancient times. Heritage sites act as landmarks and anchor points for local identities; local communities see ruined towers as the heritage of ancestors, both historical and mythical. Georgia is rich in mythological epics whose stories intertwine in the ruins of collapsed complexes. The remains of religious buildings also contribute in building and maintaining a strong identity and territorial belonging. Some churches, of which only the foundations remain, remain annual pilgrimage sites that gather communities to celebrate. Approximately 292 cultural heritage elements or sites of local cultural interest were identified within 2 or 3km of the Project Component lines. Sites identified during the surveys were organised into the following categories: • Cemeteries: Orthodox tradition proceeds to the burial of the bodies in common cemetery. The rituals are very codified, and the graves of the deceased are visited regularly. Facilities are generally provided to allow relatives to gather around the deceased's grave; • Grave: it is common for families to choose to bury their relatives on private land. Some of these isolated graves have been identified in the vicinity of the planned lines; • Religious building (operating mosque and operating and ruined churches): Ruined churches and operating churches have been distinguished in the survey, but it is important to note that the sacredness of a church is often maintained even when the building is collapsed. Ruined churches can be visited during pilgrimages organised by local communities and facilities are set up near the ruins for the celebrations. Some mosques and/or Muslim funeral places have also been identified, mostly in the west part of Georgia; • Ruined complex: This category includes buildings in ruins whether their origin is known or not (such as towers, fortress, ramparts, and monasteries). As indicated previously, Georgia is rich in these historical remains that attest to an ancient and continuous occupation. A large part of these ruined complexes is commonly associated with the medieval period, but it is likely that their use covers several centuries; and • Archaeological value: This category exclusively includes sites mentioned in specialised literature. It refers to sites where archaeological artefacts dating from the Bronze Age, or older, have been excavated. This typology is used in Document 4.2 for mapping, but these categories do not reflect the cultural and historical diversity of each site. When a site is found to be located on a planned OHL route, more specific information is provided in Document 4.2 , when available.
Page 39
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
4.10.2 Intangible Cultural Heritage “Intangible cultural heritage” is defined by the UNESCO as the practices, representations, expressions, knowledge, skills – as well as the instruments, objects, artefacts and cultural spaces associated therewith – that communities, groups and, in some cases, individuals recognise as part of their cultural heritage. This intangible cultural heritage, transmitted from generation to generation, is constantly recreated by communities and groups in response to their environment, their interaction with nature and their history, and provides them with a sense of identity and continuity, thus promoting respect for cultural diversity and human creativity. Intangible cultural heritage is manifested notably in oral traditions and expressions (including language), performing arts; social practices, rituals and festive events; knowledge and practices concerning nature and the universe; traditional craftsmanship. The National Agency for Cultural Heritage Preservation of Georgia is the Georgian agency in charge of identification and development of intangible cultural heritage. Since 2011, 40 items have been inscribed on Georgia's Intangible Cultural Heritage Register, shown in Table 4.621 . Three of them also appear on UNESCO's list of intangible cultural heritage: Georgian polyphonic singing listed in 2008 22 , the Ancient Georgian traditional “Kvevri” wine-making method listed in 2013 23 , and the living culture of three writing systems of the Georgian alphabet listed in 2016 24 . The other 37 elements inscribed on Georgia's Intangible Cultural Heritage Register are culinary traditions and meals, dances and songs, clothing, literature elements, rituals or social traditions.
Table 4.6 – Registry of Intangible Cultural Heritage of Georgia
# Item Date inscribed Comment
1 Georgian polyphonic singing 17 November Inscribed in 2008 on UNESCO's Representative List of the 2011 Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity (originally proclaimed in 2001).
2 Kvevri 17 November Large egg-shaped earthenware vessels used for the 2011 fermentation, storage, and ageing of traditional Georgian wine.
3 Traditional kvevri wine-making 27 March 2012 Inscribed in 2013 on UNESCO's Representative List of the method Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity.
4 Dedaena, an introduction to 25 March 2013 Dedaena, literally, "a mother tongue", a children's primer Georgian for children compiled and published in 1876 by Iakob Gogebashvili
5 Traditional dance Perkhuli 25 March 2013 A predominantly male folk round dance, with as many as 20 versions.
6 Berikaoba 25 March 2013 An improvised masqueraded folk theatre, stemming from a pre- Christian festivity of fertility and rebirth.
7 Kakhetian Mravalzhamieri 25 March 2013 A polyphonic folk song Mravalzhamieri ("polychronion") from the region of Kakheti.
8 "Urban" Mravalzhamieri 25 March 2013 An urban version of Mravalzhamieri from Tbilisi.
______
21 Source: National Agency for Cultural Heritage Preservation of Georgia. https://heritagesites.ge/
22 https://ich.unesco.org/en/RL/georgian-polyphonic-singing-00008 retrieved on 03/10/2018
23 https://ich.unesco.org/en/RL/ancient-georgian-traditional-qvevri-wine-making-method-00870 retrieved on 03/10/2018
24 https://ich.unesco.org/en/RL/living-culture-of-three-writing-systems-of-the-georgian-alphabet-01205 retrieved on 03/10/2018
Page 40
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
# Item Date inscribed Comment
9 Children's literary magazine 25 November A popular children's literary magazine founded in 1928 as Dila 2013 Oktombreli and renamed in 1947 as Dila ("The Morning").
10 Traditional dance Khorumi 25 November A traditional war dance, originally from the region of Adjara. 2013
11 Meskhetian cheese Tenili 25 November Originally from the region of Meskheti, Tenili is made of threads 2013 of rich cow's or sheep's milk cheese briefly brined before being pressed into a clay pot.
12 "Makeup Anointment", an 5 January 2014 An annual induction ceremony of the Tbilisi-based Shota annual Shota Rustaveli Rustaveli Theatre and Film University freshmen held at Theatre and Film University Marjanishvili Memorial Museum in Kvareli, a tradition students induction ceremony established in 1974.
13 Literary magazine Tsiskari 5 January 2014 The Georgian-language literary magazine Tsiskari ("The Dawn"), founded in 1852.
14 Technology and culture of the 5 January 2014 The Lagidze Waters are a popular brand of soft drinks established Lagidze Waters by Mitropane Lagidze in 1887.
15 Chidaoba, a Georgian 25 September A Georgian folk wrestling style. wrestling style 2014
16 Dambalkhacho 25 September A variety of moistened curd from the highland province of 2014 Pshavi.
17 "Living culture of three writing 20 March 2015 Inscribed in 2016 on UNESCO's Representative List of the systems of the Georgian Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity. alphabet"
18 Chuniri 20 March 2015 A bowed folk musical instrument from the region of Svaneti.
19 Svan hat 20 March 2015 Traditional technology of felted wool hat making from Svaneti, one of important elements of the Svan cultural identity.
20 Svan cuisine: P'etvraal 20 March 2015 A Svanetian variety of khachapuri, a traditional Georgian dish of cheese-filled bread, but with added millet flour to its cheese filling.
21 Svan cuisine: Kubdari (Kubed) 20 March 2015 A meat filled pastry, a signature dish of Svaneti.
22 Svan cuisine: Svanuri Marili or 20 March 2015 Svanetian salt, a traditional spicy salt blend. Lushnu Jim
23 Svan cuisine: Tashmjab 20 March 2015 A cream of potatoes and cheese mixed with corn flour from Svaneti.
24 Tradition of learning 7 October 2015 The tradition of learning and reciting the 12th-century national Vepkhistqaosani by heart epic Vepkhistqaosani ("The Knight in the Panther's Skin") by Shota Rustaveli, composed of some 1,500 stanzas, was widespread among the Georgians, especially young women, and survived into the 21st century.
25 Tradition of use of medicinal 15 October 2015 The mineral springs of Mugviri, Artskheeli, Kakhrld, Legab, Seti, mineral springs in Upper Kvedilash, and Shdegi have been used for medicinal purposes for Svaneti several centuries.
Page 41
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
# Item Date inscribed Comment
26 Traditional technique of 15 October 2015 Changi is a Svanetian version of an ancient harp-like instrument making the Svanetian folk with at least six strings. instrument Changi
27 Tradition of wood carving in 15 October 2015 Pieces of vernacular architecture and churches in highland Svanetian architecture and Svaneti are richly adorned with ornate wood carving, a tradition household items going back to the Middle Ages.
28 Literary magazine Gantiadi 15 October 2015 Gantiadi ("The Daybreak"), a Georgian literary magazine established in Kutaisi in 1915.
29 Technology of Kakhetian 7 November 2015 Churchkhela made in Georgia's wine-making region of Kakheti is Churchkhela a particularly popular variety of this traditional Georgian candle- shaped candy, strings of nuts that are repeatedly dipped in concentrated grape juice.
30 Kakhetian hat 7 November 2015 A felted hat from the region of Kakheti.
31 Kakhetian bread "dedas puri" 7 November 2015 Dedas puri ("mother's bread") is a Kakhetian type of tonis puri, baked in a specific bakery.
32 Tradition of pottery in 7 November 2015 The village of Vardisubani is the principal center of traditional Vardisubani pottery in Kakheti.
33 Svan funeral ritual with zari 16 March 2016 Zari (zär) is a funeral chant from Svaneti, bearing traces of pre- Christian tradition.
34 Tradition of falconry 27 October 2016 Old Georgian tradition of falconry, bazieroba.
35 Supra, a traditional Georgian 29 March 2017 Supra, a traditional Georgian feast and an important part of feast Georgian social culture.
36 Traditional culture and 9 June 2017 Traditional Georgian cotton tablecloths painted in various shades manufacturing technology of of blue, known from at least the 17th century. blue tablecloth
37 Georgian folk medicine 23 August 2017 Georgian folk medicine and traditions associated with its use
38 Twenty-six-century-long 13 April 2018 The Jewish presence in Georgia is regarded to have began with tradition of the Georgian– their exodus during the Babylonian captivity in 6th century BC. Jewish relations
39 Tskhavati pottery 13 April 2018 Tradition of pottery from the village of Tskhavati.
40 Georgian silk 12 June 2018
Page 42
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Project-wide Impact Assessment
5.15.15.1 Introduction The Project-wide Impact Assessment looks at the impact at a wider scale. Instead of assessing impacts at the local level, it addresses the impacts for a whole territory formed of all the municipalities impacted by the Project. It concerns the following positives and adverse impacts: • Creation of employment opportunities and more reliable electric power; • Restriction of access to land and resources/or economic displacement; • Public transport infrastructures issues; • Health and safety issues; • Occupational Health and Safety issues; and • Cultural Heritage issues. These impacts are analysed for both construction and operation phases. Impacts on tourism from OHL are related to visual and landscape impacts. These impacts are assessed in Volume 5 – Physical Environment . Some community health and safety issues are also treated in the Volume 5 , such as noise generated by the Project, or the influence of Project activities on geohazards and the consequences for the neighbouring communities.
5.25.25.2 Positive impacts
5.2.1 Construction Employment During the construction of the power lines and the substations, the Project will generate temporary employment opportunities, whether skilled, semi-skilled or as unskilled jobs. The workers for the transmission line construction will be organised in several crews working in parallel and moving along the lines (see Chapter 3, Volume 2 Project Definition ). The number of crews and the estimated number of workers are indicated in Table 5.1. Each crew will work only a few days at each work site. Each tower installation will likely be spread over two weeks, based on the following schedule: • Excavation: 1 day; • Reinforcement stubs: 1 day; • Foundation works: 1 day; • Wait 7 days before erection of tower to allow foundations to set; followed by • Tower installation and electrical mounting: 1 day. The OHL crews would work only temporarily in an area of approximately 10 towers, and the construction works in each area will be completed in about one month. At each new substation, the number of workers would approximately be around 100, with works lasting for approximately 15 to 27 months.
Page 43
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
One of the key social impacts would be the provision of an income source for workers and their families contributing to their wellbeing and enhancing their quality of life. The Project would ensure that local workers are provided opportunities to be recruited and trained. Therefore, the professional competences gained by local employees through on their job experience would benefit future job prospects. However, this impact would be relatively limited, as the number of workers employed would be relatively limited. The magnitude of this impact is considered as low because the increased income will only concern a limited number of workers during the construction period.
Table 5.1 – Estimated number of workers for transmission line construction Number of line > 40km line < 40km workers per crew Number of Total number Number of Total number crews working of workers crews working of workers in parallel working in in parallel working in parallel parallel
Foundations of ~15 3 crews ~45 2 crews ~30 towers
Towers erection ~12 3 crews ~36 2 crews ~24
Electrical mounting ~30 3 crews ~90 2 crews ~60
Total ~57 9 crews ~171 6 crews ~114
Local business development and Supply chain opportunities The Project activities would provide opportunities for companies at the national, and possibly regional, level to supply goods and services. Local purchases of goods and services directly by the Project and workers during construction would foster the local economy. It would particularly concern communities directly affected by the Project, but also other nearby communities located in the vicinity of the camps. In urban centres, the Construction Contractors would use local accommodation in settlements wherever possible, and wherever the Lenders requirements on workforce accommodation can be met (see Volume 8 ESMP ), whereas temporary construction camps will be needed in remote areas. This would generate additional income for those renting rooms to accommodate the Project workers. This positive impact would, however, be temporary, as it would last only during the construction phase, and would particularly concern the communities crossed by the project. The magnitude of this impact is considered as low.
5.2.2 Operation National Electricity Production The Project is part of a wider programme being implemented over a ten years period by GSE to strengthen the power transmission grid in Georgia in order to improve cross border trade opportunities, to meet increased power demands and to connect existing and planned power projects, principally the growth of hydropower. Although Georgia has no overall shortage of supply, it is highly dependent on imported electricity to meet seasonal demand, raising concerns over security of supply. Furthermore, without major investments in domestic seasonal generation, the security of electric power supply would diminish even further as Georgia’s economy grows. During the past five years, demand for electricity grew in line with the economy, at an average annual
Page 44
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019 rate of 3.9 %. Over the next 10 years, power demand is expected to increase at an average annual rate of 3 to 5 %. As outlined in Volume 2 , the aims of the Project are to: • Improve reliability of the existing network by increasing transfer capacity of internal Georgian network; • Satisfy the growing demand for electricity; • Increase export of power to strengthen the regional power grid; • Benefit Georgia’s economy and strengthen ties with major allies; and • Improve the evacuation of the HPP’s power as a major part of the Project is devoted to the reliable integration of HPPs into the national network. Employment During the operation of the power lines and the substations, there will be some limited job opportunities for the operation of the substations. New staff could be employed, or staff from elsewhere in GSE would be mobilised. The estimated number of new jobs at each substation would be up to 10 at a maximum. The job opportunities would be distributed as follows: • Ozurgeti substation: 8 workers; • Nenskra substation: up to 10 workers; • Telavi substation: additional 5 workers; • Lajanuri substation: up to 10 workers; but • No additional workers would be needed at Akhmeta, Mukuzani, Gurjaani, Tsinandali and Akhaltsikhe substations. The impact from these job opportunities would be limited, but the new workers would benefit from increased income, and training opportunities. The magnitude of this impact is considered as low because the increased income would only concern a limited number of workers during the operation period. The significance of this impact is also considered to be low.
5.35.35.3 Negative impacts
5.3.1 Land acquisition and involuntary resettlement The impacts of the Project’s land acquisition are described in detail and mitigated in the Volume 7 Land Acquisition, Resettlement and Compensation Framework . The Project-wide impacts are synthesised hereafter for the reader’s convenience. Sources of impacts Permanent Land acquisitions – construction and operation Component A, B, C1, C2 and D will require land acquisitions for sitting towers, building substations and roads access 25 . In total 44.5ha of land will be needed 26 . Acquisitions of land are permanent, and in some circumstances,
______
25 At this stage, the number and location of the access roads are not known.
26 The detailed calculation can be found in the Volume 7 LARCF.
Page 45
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019 landholders may have to be physically displaced. Table 5.2 indicates (i) the surface area of the permanent land acquisitions for each component, (ii) the total surface area of the municipalities crossed by each component, and (iii) the final percentage of land required it represents. In total, the components will require 44.5ha of land 27 . However, the permanent land requirements for the all Project only represent 0,002% of the total surface area of all the municipalities crossed by the Project.
Table 5.2 – Estimated permanent Land acquisitions for the all Project
Component Estimated permanent Surface area of Percentage of land land acquisitions municipalities required A 6.5ha 301,914ha 0,002% B 1.7ha 150,219ha 0,001% C1 6.2ha 306,845ha 0,002% C2 26.8ha 585,362ha 0,004% D 3.3ha 423,010ha 0,0007% Total 44.5ha 1,767,350ha 0,002%
Another source of permanent impact will be the restrictions on land use in the OHL Right of Way (RoW). The servitude in this RoW must be kept clear of buildings. It is not legally 28 permitted to live in a house located inside an OHL RoW. Temporary Land requirements - construction There could also be temporary impacts on private land where there is a requirement for the construction of compounds and laydown areas, access roads or working areas to raise the towers. As there will be restrictions to land for certain landholders, temporary land requirements could also negatively impact individual economic activities for those whose main source of income depends on agriculture. In many cases the working areas are remote, and no direct access is currently available from the local highway network, so access roads will be required to provide suitable access to the working areas. Currently, the number and location of temporary construction compounds and access roads are not yet known. Therefore, the type of land impacted is not defined. The typical site compounds would encompass an area of up to 100m by 100m enclosed by secure fencing. Access roads will be needed to reach working areas, construction compounds, the substations as well as the tower locations. They will be used to bring workers and materials to the tower sites to conduct various activities such as tree-cutting operations (where needed), to construct foundations, and assemble and raise the towers. Clearing for access roads will be 4m to 5m metres in width although these could be wider in places depending upon topography and access requirements. In certain locations where the construction of access tracks and use of vehicles is not possible (e.g. at high altitude or on steep slopes), the use of helicopters is possible in order to transport materials and pre-assembled sections
______
27 Refer to impacts assessment sections in the Document 4.2.
28 As defined in the Government of Georgia (24 December 2014) Decree #366 On Regulation for Protection of Linear Structures of Power Networks and Determination of Zones of Protection
Page 46
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019 of towers. If helicopters are used temporary areas maybe approximately two hectares (200m by 100m) enclosed by temporary fencing. Permanent restriction on land use - operation Restrictions on land use are mainly due to the easement for the RoW. The servitude in this RoW is legally defined and allows power transmission and distribution companies to access properties directly beneath and to either side of a transmission line. Also called an easement, a RoW is periodically used to perform maintenance or repair equipment and must be kept clear of buildings. There are also restrictions on tree and vegetation growth due to operational requirements for clearances from conductor lines. The RoW width depends on the voltage of the line and the height of the structures. It includes the area extending for a certain distance from the edge conductors on each side. The width of the transmission line Row depends on technical and environmental standards defined in the Decree 366 (Government of Georgia, 2014 29 ) On Regulation for Protection of Linear Structures of Power Networks and Determination of Zones of Protection . The document’s objective is to facilitate the uninterrupted functioning of the power grid, to ensure safe operations, to meet the requirements of the sanitary and safety norms, and to prevent accidents. According to that Decree, the affected lands in the Right of Way remain in possession of the owner, however, it is prohibited to plant trees (other than fruit trees below 4m in height) or construct structures and buildings, but other agricultural activities such as crops and grazing are allowed. Component A, B, C1, C2 and D will require permanent restriction on land over the entire surface of the Right of Ways (RoW) as it will be prohibited to plant trees or construct structures and buildings within. It could impact any landholder whose plot of land is located within the RoW. At a local level, the sensitivity of the impact is considered as low because other agricultural activities such as crops and grazing are allowed. Table 5.3 indicates (i) the surface area of the Row for each component, (ii) the total surface area of the municipalities crossed by each component, and (iii) the final percentage of land required it represents.
Table 5.3 – Permanent restriction on land for the all Project
Component Right of Way Surface area of municipalities Percentage of land potentially affected A 1,036ha 301,914ha 0.34% B 242ha 150,219ha 0.16% C1 294ha 306,845ha 0.09% C2 1201ha 585,362ha 0.20% D 425ha 423,010ha 0.10% Total 3,198ha 1,767,350ha 0.18%
In total, the Project Components would permanently restrict land use on 3,194ha of land. However, the permanent restriction on land for the total Project represent less than 1% of the total surface area of all the municipalities crossed by the Project. Furthermore, agricultural and pastoral activities are authorised within the RoW, so agricultural activities will not be impacted by restriction on land use.
______
29 Government of Georgia (24 December 2014) Decree #366 On Regulation for Protection of Linear Structures of Power Networks and Determination of Zones of Protection
Page 47
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Temporary restriction on land use - operation Temporary restriction on land mainly concerns access roads used for maintenance work. Maintenance activities would require temporary access to areas near the tower locations for irregular and short-term work. The restriction on land would be temporary and would concern only small pieces of land. Impacts assessment Two types of impacts will occur: (i) physical displacement and (ii) economic displacement. Physical displacement is defined 30 as loss of shelter or the physical relocation of a person from his/her pre-project place of residence as a result of (i) involuntary acquisition of land, or (ii) involuntary restrictions on land use or on access to land. Economic displacement 31 is defined as the loss of land, assets, access to assets, income sources, or means of livelihoods as a result of (i) involuntary acquisition of land, or (ii) involuntary restrictions on land use or on access to land. Physical displacement The potential physical displacement impacts have been estimated based on interpretation of aerial imagery and field observation along the proposed RoW. Each house or potential residential structure located in the RoW has been identified, regardless of its status (either occupied or derelict). Each house located in a RoW has been considered as potentially requiring resettlement. The total number of households potentially resettled is indicated in Table 5.4. People’s homes and places of residency are a sensitive receptor, because of emotional attachment. Any involuntary physical resettlement is considered an impact of high magnitude for the affected persons. Before mitigation, the significance of this impact is considered to be high.
______
30 In EBRD PR5
31 idem
Page 48
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Table 5.4 – Overview of potential physical displacement by Project Components Component Total
A B C1 C2 D
Estimated number of residential structures located in the 4 0 4 3 5 16 Right of Way (considered as approximately equivalent to number of households a)
Estimated number of residential structures located in the 4 0 1 1 1 7 Right of Way (considered as abandoned or uninhabited b)
Corresponding estimated number of persons c 14 0 14 10 17 55
a It is assumed that each structure located within the RoW is potentially a residential house housing one household.
b The field missions identified some abandoned or uninhabited structures. c According to the National Statistics Office of Georgia (GEOSTAT), in 2016 the average number of members per household is 3.3 persons. This average number has been retained to estimate the number of people potentially living or using the residential structures located in the RoW.
Economic displacement The type of activities conducted on the affected lands determines the sensitivity of the receptors (e.g. the households who are using the land). The potential economic displacement impacts have been estimated using aerial imagery and information collected during walkover field missions. Five main categories of potentially impacted land use have been identified. These categories are defined according to uses and not land tenures or registration status. The possible economic or subsistence activities for each land use category and their sensitivity are presented in Table 5.5. Maps showing the land use by Project Component are provided in Document 4.2 .
Table 5.5 – Land use categories and their sensitivity
Type of activities conducted on Rationale Sensitivity affected land
Farming activities on Georgia is an industrial society where agriculture still Medium to High, depending on the agricultural land (all lands used contributes much to the national economic dependency of the affected households for farming purposes, whether development. In rural areas, population does not have on the activities conducted on the owned by the state, private many alternative employment opportunities. impacted land plot companies or families, and used Agricultural activities are essential for the households’ for economic purposes income and subsistence. (generating cash income) or for In some areas, industrial agricultural activities or large- subsistence activities) scale vine production is also an important economic activity.
Small-scale crop farming on Households often conduct small scale crop farming on Medium to High, depending on the residential land (all areas on their residential land plots, for their own consumption dependency of the affected households which structures have been or for selling. on the activities conducted on the identified. It was not always This category also covers hotels, shops or other impacted land plot possible to distinguish houses businesses. from other types of dwellings, or to establish if the structures were occupied or derelict from the aerial imagery.)
Page 49
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Type of activities conducted on Rationale Sensitivity affected land
Use of natural resources / Forests are used in rural areas by the local communities Low to Medium, depending on the Forests (dense wooded areas) to collect firewood and in some area some non-timber dependency of the affected households forest products, such as mushrooms or berries. on the natural resources
Use of communal resources In Mountainous areas, grazing land are often located in Low to Medium, depending on the such as open grazing land – highlands and are used collectively. This is the case for dependency of the affected households (includes all other type of land some sections of Components A, B and C1 (see on the collective grazing areas in use not cited above) Document 4.2 ). highlands.
The number of land plots potentially impacted has been used to assess the order of magnitude of the economic displacement. The estimation of this number was based on publicly available information from the National Cadastre and available aerial imagery. All registered land plots partially or completely located in the RoW have been counted. The Cadastral database is being updated continuously; the information used is dated from end of July 2018. The land plots used informally for residential or agriculture purposes (State land used by private users) have been identified and counted based on interpretation of aerial imagery. More than half of the impacted land plots are registered, and less than half are State Land privately used without being registered.
Table 5.6 – Overview of number of land plots potentially impacted by Project Components
Type of impact Component Total
A B C1 C2 D
Total registered land 458 133 194 747 896 2,428 plots
Estimate of non- registered plots used by private users 550 100 280 540 660 2,130 (agriculture conducted on State land) *
* These figures are based on the interpretation of aerial imagery: evidences of plots with farming activities are conducted have been counted. Permanent land requirements are likely to be limited and it will be possible to adjust the location of the towers to avoid buildings or productive lands. The majority of the impacts will be related to the restriction of use in the RoW. The restriction will mainly concern the construction of buildings, which will be forbidden. Agricultural activities such as crop farming or grazing will be allowed in the RoW. The significance of potential economic displacement impacts on affected households will be the extent to which their incomes and/or means of livelihoods are affected by the loss of land and/or productive assets due to permanent and temporary land acquisition or restriction on land use. It will depend on (i) the dependency of the affected households on economic and/or subsistence activities conducted on the affected land plot and/or affected assets and (ii) the percentage of the land or productive assets lost by the affected households. The impacts will be defined in detail during the preparation of the Resettlement Action Plans for each of the Project’s components, as defined in the Volume 7 LARCF . Given the scale of the permanent land requirements shown in Table 5.2, it is not expected that the economic activities could be impacted at a community or Municipal level.
Page 50
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
5.3.2 Interaction with Community infrastructures Impact on public traffic Construction The construction activities which can be potential source of impacts on public traffic are: • Additional traffic on the existing roads generated by normal construction activities, to bring equipment, machinery or concrete and workers to the construction sites; • Abnormal loads used for the delivery of the larger items such as transformers to substations and the towers sections. This vehicles or convoys will be too long or too wide to use the road in normal conditions and which have to be escorted and to drive slower than the rest of the traffic; and • Stringing conductors when the OHL will cross a road. This additional traffic and the abnormal loads have the potential to impact on the existing traffic on public roads in the following ways: • Deterioration of local roads by heavy goods vehicles; • Delays to and obstruction of local traffic, especially during abnormal loads; and • Temporary road closures at the OHL crossings locations, for the time needed to string the conductors. Even though the Project has the potential to result in the above impacts, they are likely to be of low to negligible magnitude based on the following: • The traffic associated with the Project construction activities is likely to be occasional, short-term and low in numbers, resulting in negligible impacts; • Abnormal loads will be limited to the installation of the power transformers at some of the substations: o Four abnormal loads for the substation in Ozurgeti (Component B); o Nine in Lajanuri (Component C2); o One in Gurjaani and one in Telavi (Component D). • Conductor installation works will require to the temporary closure of roads, stopping traffic, while installing and stretching conductors. Impacts are likely to be very localised on road crossings and the closure will be very short, no more than a few hours. Therefore, before mitigation, the magnitude of impacts on public traffic will be low. Overall the impact before mitigation is considered to be low to negligible for all Project Components, depending on the sensitivity of the road network as described in the baseline (Section 4.9.1). Operation During operation, the project related traffic will be limited to maintenance along the OHL corridor and substations and will not interact with community infrastructures. It is not expected that heavy goods vehicle will be used unless there is a requirement to undertake major repairs on the lines or substations. The likelihood of this occurring is very low. Hence, no negative impact on local traffic is expected during operation.
Aircraft Navigation Safety During operation, power transmission towers and OHL, if located near an airport or known flight paths, can impact aircraft safety directly through collision or indirectly through radar interference. The impact assessment for each Component is provided in Document 4.2.
Page 51
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Railways safety Construction As per the impacts on roads, conductors’ installation works are likely to be the most disturbing phase, as it may require stopping the train traffic while installing and stretching conductors. One railway is crossed by the Sairme line Component A, and one other by the Mukuzani loop on Component D. The impact assessments are provided in Document 4.2. The other lines do not cross any railway. Operation During operation, it is not expected that any maintenance activity will impact the railways, except if there is a need to replace a conductor above a rail. The likelihood of this occurring is very low. Hence, no negative impact on railways is expected during operation.
5.3.3 Community Health and safety The main factors which could impact community health and safety during construction comprise: • Noise, dust, exhaust emissions from vehicles or machinery and vibration from Project activities; • Adverse community health and safety impacts due to introduced workforce, such as propagation of communicable disease or other impacts; and • Risk of accidents in areas where the road traffic will increase. During operation, the potential impacts will be related to maintenance activities and exposure to EMF, but also electrical interference which could cause potential health impact or disturb sensitive equipment (such as radio and computer monitors). Communities in the immediate neighbourhood of the power lines could be impacted during construction and operation. As there will be no buildings within the RoW, only households situated close to the RoW or conducting activities in the RoW will be concerned by potential health and safety issues. The sensitive areas in terms of community health and safety have been presented in Section 4.7.1: in 93 areas, there are communities residing or working within a 500m corridor from the transmission lines current alignment. The health and safety of these communities is considered of low to medium sensitivity as per the criteria listed in Table 3.4. Noise, dust, and vibration from project activities and machinery Construction The main disruption factors on local population during construction work would be temporary. It concerns noise, dust, exhaust emissions from vehicles or machinery and vibration from Project activities and machinery to nearby residents that are in close proximity to working areas. These emissions, which have potential to affect human health will be rather limited for each potential receptor, as planned works at each affected site would be small scale and short-term. Exhaust emissions from vehicles or machinery would be negligible and there is no risk to influence surrounding community members. The sensitivity of the receptors (local communities’ health) is considered to be low to medium sensitivity as per the criteria listed in Table 3.4. It is a short-term impact that only concerns specific sites working areas. The impact assessment is provided in Document 4.2 . Operation Noise, dust, exhaust emissions from vehicles or machinery and vibration would only occur at operation time during maintenance activities. These emissions, which have potential to affect human health, would be very limited as planned works at each affected site would be small scale, punctual and short-term. The significance of this impact is considered to be low.
Page 52
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
During operation, noise would be emitted from the conductors at and above 220kV and the substation. Noise in the form of buzzing or humming can often be heard around high voltage power lines producing corona. Ozone, a colourless gas with a pungent odour, may also be produced at the substation, but in such small quantities local to the substation. Neither the noise nor ozone produced by high voltage transmission lines carries any known risk 32 . Noise from high voltage transmission lines reaches its maximum during periods of precipitation, including rain, sleet, snow or hail, or as the result of fog. The sound of rain typically masks the increase in noise produced by the transmission lines, but during other forms of precipitation and fog, the noise from overhead power lines can be troubling to nearby residents. These impacts are assessed in detail in the Volume 5 – Physical Environment . The Project’s components will be designed to meet the limits defined in the Georgian, WHO, IFC/World Bank guidelines with respect to operational noise. There are no Georgian standards for construction noise and the IFC EHS standards are also not designed for construction works, which are typically temporary and short term in nature. For this reason, noise limits taken from GIP, such as the British Standard BS5228:2009+A1:2014 - Code of Practice for Noise and Vibration Control on Construction and Open Sites’ Parts 1 – Noise, would be appropriate and would be determined in consultation with GSE/Implementation Consultant. The Design and Construction contractor(s) are contractually required to comply with these limits. Adverse community health and safety impacts due to introduced workforce Construction Workers would be employed during the construction phase, as described in Section 5.2.1. Several crews of about 10 to 30 workers could be employed for the construction of each overhead line and would be working consecutively along the line’s route. Part of the workforce is expected to come from local Municipalities which are not crossed by the overhead lines, if they cannot be recruited within the Municipalities within which the component is located. In rural, remote or small communities, the influx of workers during construction could lead to adverse social and environmental impacts. Such adverse impacts may include increased demand and competition for goods and services, which can lead to price rises and crowding out of local consumers, increased demands on the ecosystem and natural resources, social conflicts within and between communities, risk of increased incidence of communicable diseases (including STI/HIV), and increased rates of illicit behaviour and crime. In remote and rural communities, such adverse impacts are usually amplified by local-level low capacity to manage and absorb the incoming labour force. Many of these potential impacts may only be identified once a contractor is appointed and the sourcing of the required labour force completed. The magnitude of these potential impacts depends on the number of workers employed and present at once in a local community and on the strategy defined to accommodate these workers. The number of workers employed by the Project on each component would be relatively small (between 1 to 3 crews of 10 to 30 workers, so 30 to 90 workers on each transmission line and about 100 at each substations at any one time, see Volume 2 , and Section 5.2.1 of this Document 4.1 ). The magnitude of impact will be a function of the number of workers compared to the total population of the local communities in which they are accommodated. The impact magnitude will, therefore, be greater in small communities than in larger ones. The sensitivity of the receptors (local communities’ health) is considered of low to medium sensitivity as per the criteria listed in Table 3.4. Rural, remote or small communities will be considered of medium sensitivity, while urban centres will be considered of low sensitivity.
______
32 World Health Organization. 1998. Electromagnetic fields and public health: extremely low frequency (ELF) Fact Sheet. Available online at: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs205/en.
Page 53
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Therefore, without mitigation, the impact significance is considered low in urban centres, and could be medium to high in rural, remote, small communities. Operation As the number of employees on site during the operation phase is expected to be intermittent and very low, limited to the maintenance activities, the risk of adverse community health and safety impacts due to introduced workforce is not expected during the operation phase. Risk of accidents Construction Necessary equipment for the construction of high voltage lines will be stored in construction compounds and/or working areas, places that could be dangerous for the surrounding communities. There is a risk that residents in the immediate vicinity of the construction sites could get injured in contact with heavy equipment They could also be accidently exposed to hazardous materials at the substation (such as chemicals, like insulating oils/gases, e.g. Polychlorinated Biphenyls [PCB] and sulphur hexafluoride [SF6], see Section 5.3.4). Any exposed excavation could also lead to falls and injuries if not fenced off. Even if the likelihood of such accidents is low, the consequences could be important, potentially leading to injuries or lethal accidents. The significance of such impacts could, therefore, be considered to be high. During the construction phase, as explained in Section 5.3.2, the traffic associated with the Project construction activities is likely to be occasional, short-term and low in numbers, resulting in impacts of negligible magnitude. Without mitigation, the significance of such impacts is considered to be low. Operation Adverse impacts on community health and safety during the operation phase mainly concern risk of electrocution from direct contact with high-voltage electricity or from contact with tools, vehicles, ladders, or other devices that are in contact with high-voltage electricity. Neighbouring residents could also be electrocuted or harmed by falling towers, towers and live lines in case of line or tower failure (from earthquakes or high winds, for example), though such occurrences are considered to be highly unlikely. Even if the likelihood of such accident is low, the consequences could be fatal, potentially leading to injuries or lethal accidents. This risk will be a long-term risk, as it will last as long as the Project operates. Before any mitigation measure, the impact significance is considered low for Component D, but high for the other components. For component D, as the Project will mostly rehabilitate existing lines, the communities will not face a greater risk than the risk they are already experiencing with the existing line. The rehabilitation of the lines will lower the exiting risk, by renewing the used towers and materials. Electric and Magnetic Fields Construction Electric and magnetic field negative impacts do not concern the construction phase. Operation Electric and magnetic fields (also known as electromagnetic fields, EMF) are invisible lines of force emitted by and surrounding any electrical device, including power lines and electrical equipment. All equipment that generates, distributes or uses electricity produces EMFs. Electric fields are produced by voltage, they increase in strength as the voltage increases, and they are measured in volts per meter (V/m). Electric fields are blocked or shielded by materials that conduct electricity, and other materials such as trees and buildings. Magnetic fields depend on the electrical currents flowing, which vary according to the electrical power requirements at any given time and are measured in microteslas (µT). Magnetic fields pass through most materials and are difficult to shield
Page 54
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019 but both electric and magnetic fields decrease rapidly with distance from the source and are present in all areas where electricity is in use (e.g. public buildings and homes), arising from electric cabling and equipment in the area. Project activities that will generate EMF include operation of the energised transmission line and substations. EMF in the range of power line frequencies typically range from 50 to 60 Hertz (Hz) and are considered Extremely Low Frequency (ELF). EMF generation will depend on the lines voltage. Although there is limited empirical data demonstrating adverse health effects from exposure to typical EMF levels from power transmission lines and equipment 33 , there is public and scientific concern over the potential health effects associated with exposure to EMF for surrounding communities living or working near OHL and substation. The IFC recognises that evidence of adverse health risk from exposure to Electric and Magnetic Fields is weak, but still sufficient to warrant limited concern. The WHO recommends that average and peak public exposure levels should remain below the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) recommendations for Public exposure. These recommended limits are shown in Table 5.734 .
Table 5.7 – Limits for general public exposure to electric and magnetic fields
Frequency Electric Field (V/m) Magnetic Field (µT)
50 Hz 5000 100
60 Hz 4150 83
GSE commits on all its projects to comply with the above guidelines as recommended by both the IFC and European Union by designing the Project to meet the required guidelines. A transmission line can be constructed to minimise EMF by shielding specific metal alloys, increasing the height of towers, changing the size, design and spacing of conductor lines. The European Union require that the limits for public exposure apply where the “time of exposure is significant” which is taken to be residential houses, schools and hospitals. These guidelines will be met at the edge of the RoW and no buildings will be allowed in the RoW. Agricultural activities can take place within the ROW without effect though where people will be expected to undertake activities for long periods of time similar design measures to ensure compliance with the EMF guidelines will be adopted. The exposure of neighbouring communities to EMF will, therefore, be within the guideline levels, in accordance with GIP and there can be no likely significant impacts from EMF. Hence, the significance of this impact is considered negligible. The Project’s component will be designed to meet the limits defined by the WHO with regard to EMF exposure. The Design and Construction contractor(s) are contractually required to comply with these limits.
______
33 The World Health Organization (WHO) 2007’s review of EMF research has concluded that EMF do not cause any long-term, adverse health effects (WHO, 2007).
34 Source: International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection. « Guidelines for limiting exposure to time-varying electric, magnetic, and electromagnetic fields (up to 300 ghz) ». Health Physics 74, nᵒ 4 (1998): 494 ‑522; cited in « Environmental, Health, and Safety Guidelines for Electric Power Transmission and Distribution ». International finance Corporation, 2007.
Page 55
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
5.3.4 Occupational Health and Safety Construction Construction activities pose potential risks to the health, safety, security and, therefore, wellbeing of construction workers if not managed appropriately. There is the risk of adverse occupational health and safety (OHS) impacts related to personal accident or injury on any construction site. There are also potentially adverse impacts on workers related to their terms of engagement and relationship with their employer. The occupational health and safety risks likely to arise during the construction and operation (maintenance) of electric power distribution projects are common to those of industrial facilities 35 . These impacts include, among others: • exposure to physical hazards from use of heavy equipment and cranes and from driving; • trip and fall hazards; • exposure to dust and noise; • falling objects; • work in confined spaces; • exposure to hazardous materials; and • exposure to electrical hazards from the use of tools and machinery. Occupational health and safety hazards specific to construction of electric power transmission projects primarily include: • live power lines: Workers may be exposed to occupational hazards from contact with live power lines during construction activities (during commissioning works when the line is being electrified). • working at height: Workers may be exposed to occupational hazards when working at elevation during construction of the towers and the Conductor Wire Stringing operations. • electric and magnetic fields (EMF): Electric utility workers typically have a higher exposure to EMF than the general public due to working in proximity to existing electric power lines. In addition, works conducted in substations, such as during substation rehabilitation or operation and maintenance, could expose the workers to chemicals, like insulating oils/gases (e.g. Polychlorinated Biphenyls [PCB] and sulphur hexafluoride [SF6]). • Highly-refined, mineral insulating oils are used to cool transformers and provide electrical insulation between live components. They are typically found in the largest quantities at electrical substations and maintenance shops. Sulphur Hexafluoride (SF6) may also be used as a gas insulator for electrical switching equipment and in cables, tubular transmission lines, and transformers. SF6 may be used as an alternative to insulating oils. • Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB) were widely used as a dielectric fluid to provide electrical insulation, although their use has been largely discontinued due to potential harmful effects on human health and the environment, it is possible PCBs could exist in soils as a result of historic spills and leaks at sites requiring rehabilitation. In urban areas and large settlements, the Construction Contractors will use local accommodation in these settlements wherever possible, and wherever the Lenders requirements regarding Workforce accommodation
______
35 These impacts, their prevention and control are discussed in the General EHS Guidelines of the IFC (http://www.ifc.org/ehsguidelines)
Page 56
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019 can be met (see Volume 8 ESMP ), whereas temporary construction camps will be needed in remote areas. In remote areas, such as the middle of Component A, where no local accommodation is available, temporary construction camp will be needed. These temporary construction camps will be established and organised in compliance with the Lenders requirements on workforce accommodation (see Volume 8 ESMP ). Workers’ health and safety is considered to be of medium sensitivity as they are vulnerable to risks to health and safety, but they have some capacity to absorb changes and take actions to protect themselves from the main risks. Even if the likelihood of such risks is low, the consequences could be important, potentially leading to injuries or lethal accidents. Therefore, the risk magnitude is considered moderate. Without any mitigation measure, the risk to the health and safety of workers during the construction phase is, therefore, considered to be an adverse impact of medium significance. Operation Operational health and safety risks will be the same as during construction. However, they will be limited to the operational and maintenance activities, which will be occasional and/or involve a limited number of workers. The most significant consequence would be electrocution from live conductors. As for the occupational health and safety risks during operation, the consequence of an accident could potentially be important, even if the likelihood is low, therefore, the risk magnitude is considered moderate. Without mitigation measures, the risk to the health and safety of workers during the operation phase is considered to be an impact of medium significance.
5.3.5 Cultural heritage Tangible cultural heritage Construction The Georgian Law on Cultural Heritage defines in its Article 36 a physical protection perimeter and a visual protection buffer around the sites registered as a UNESCO World Heritage Site, a NACHP National Monument, or a cultural monument registered by the NACHP. These perimeters are defined as: • The physical protection perimeter is defined as the height of the cultural element multiplied by two, with 50m as a minimum radius, where any activity which may damage or pose a threat of damaging a cultural property or of diminishing its scope of perception or use is not permitted; and • The visual protection perimeter prohibits any activity which may hinder optimum visibility and full perception of the cultural property and diminish its value within: o 1km for the WHS; o 500m for the immovable monument of cultural heritage of national significance registered by NACHP; and o 300m for other immovable monument of cultural heritage registered by the NACHP. As described in the baseline section, there are no tangible cultural heritage assets recognised at the world or national level located within these protection perimeters. The closest UNESCO World Heritage Site is at 7km from component C1. However, some OHLs are likely to affect cultural sites of local interest as described in the baseline sections of Document 4.2 . From a Project-wide perspective, a total of 295 cultural heritage elements have been identified in the proximity (about 2km) of the transmission lines. Forty-one cultural heritage elements have been identified inside a 500m corridor from the central lines alignments. These elements are churches, cemeteries, archaeological elements or ruins of historical value. Out of these 44 elements of cultural heritage:
Page 57
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
• Two are classified by the NACHP and are located within 300m of one of the Project Component lines: o One church registered as immovable monument of cultural heritage of national significance (around km36 of the Mestia line of Component C1), and o One ruins registered as immovable monument of cultural heritage (around km22 of the Oni line of Component C2); • Seven elements (one forest planted as a memorial of World War II, cemeteries, and ruins of historical interest) are in the Right of Way of one of the lines, and none of them is classified by the NACHP. Their impact assessments are presented in the Document 4.2 . Before mitigation, the significance of the Project’s impacts on material cultural heritage is considered low. As Georgia is rich of archaeological remains, it is possible that some archaeological artefacts could be discovered during the construction. Should this risk occur, and before any mitigation, the previously unrecorded, buried cultural heritage assets could potentially be damaged or destroyed. As these unrecorded, buried cultural heritage assets could potentially be of high value, this impact would be high in the absence of mitigation.
Operation The sensitivity of the ruins or archaeological elements is considered low. The cultural heritage elements of local value such as churches and cemeteries are considered of medium sensitivity. The elements registered by the NACHP have a medium sensitivity. The potential sources of impacts on material cultural heritage elements during operation will be twofold: • Potential disturbance from maintenance activities, and • The physical presence and visibility of the transmission lines and the other Projects elements (e.g. substations). During operation, the maintenance along the transmission line corridor and substations would be limited and would not require heavy works or movement of heavy goods vehicle would be used unless there is a requirement to undertake major repairs on the lines or substations. The likelihood of this occurring is very low. Hence, no negative impact on cultural heritage from maintenance activities is expected during operation. Regarding the physical presence and visibility of the transmission lines, towers and substations, no impacts are anticipated during operation on the cultural elements of local value (cemeteries, churches). In addition to the two elements registered by NACHP listed above, two other elements registered by the NACHP as immovable monument of cultural heritage will be located within 300m of the transmission lines (between 250m and 300m). These two elements are two ruins of historical value. The transmission lines themselves will not hinder optimum visibility and full perception of their cultural property or diminish their value. Hence, only the towers might encroach upon their visual protection perimeter. No other element registered by the NACHP as immovable monument of cultural heritage of national significance is located within 500m of any transmission lines. Therefore, the impact magnitude from physical presence and visibility of the OHL, towers and substation on material cultural heritage during operation is considered low. Therefore, before mitigation the significance of the Project’s impacts on material cultural heritage during operation is considered low. Intangible cultural heritage Intangible cultural heritage is generally without a fixed location or discrete boundaries; embedded in traditional residential and economic patterns; widely shared and resilient but also subject to loss under conditions of rapid social change; and sensitive to changing socio-economic situations and to outside cultural influence.
Page 58
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
The Project in itself would not induce any rapid social change. The relatively low number of workers at each construction site and the limited time of the construction itself would not cause any outside cultural influence or social change. Therefore, it is not anticipated that any of the Project activities could have any impact on intangible cultural heritage. The project construction and operation in itself would not impact any local social practices, representations, expressions, knowledge, skills – as well as the instruments, objects, artefacts and cultural spaces associated therewith. In the same way, the Project would not impact the transmission of these local social practices, representations, expressions, knowledge or skills.
Page 59
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Project-wide Mitigation
6.16.16.1 Introduction The Project strategy is to apply the following mitigation hierarchy: • Avoid as much as possible negative social impacts, through the design of the Project as well as following Good International Practices (GIP) construction methods and operation and maintenance activities; • Where and when avoidance is not possible, minimize the negative social impacts, by further optimising some design elements, such as the sitting of the towers or by applying GIP; • Mitigate or compensate the impacts by applying appropriate mitigation measures. Given the size of the project and due to further detailed design, the Project has adopted a practice of adaptive management in which the implementation of mitigation and management measures are responsive to further studies and changing conditions, as well as the results of monitoring throughout the Project’s construction and operational phase.
6.26.26.2 Mitigation measures
6.2.1 Positive impacts – enhancement measures During construction, to maximise positive impacts for the local communities, local employment and accommodation in local urban centres would be maximised where possible. The Construction contractors would be requested to develop a local recruitment strategy to maximise the use of local workers and ensure equal opportunities are provided to men and women in terms of employment. A target of at least 20% of local workers (defined as residing permanently in one of the Municipalities crossed by the OHL) is to be adopted by the Project. Each Construction Contractor will be required to develop an accommodation plan compliant with the Lenders requirements on workforce accommodation (see Volume 8 ESMP ) and in particular be compliant with the EBRD and IFC guidance on workers accommodation 36 . Accommodation in local urban centres will be organised wherever possible (as defined below in Section 6.2.4), and whenever the Lenders requirement on workers accommodation can be met. These accommodation plans will be signed-off and monitored by GSE. These measures are referred in this report as: • [SOC 1] Local Recruitment Plans and target of 20% of local workers employed during construction; • [SOC 2] Accommodation Plans signed-off by GSE for each construction contractor.
6.2.2 Land acquisition and involuntary resettlement The strategy to avoid, minimise and compensate or mitigate the impacts of the land acquisition process is described in detail in the report Volume 7 – Land Acquisition Resettlement and Compensation Framework (LARCF). It is synthesised hereafter for the reader’s convenience. This LARCF describes the processes and institutional arrangements put in place to avoid, minimise and compensate or mitigate land acquisition impacts. It complies with the Georgian legal framework and with EBRD PR5 on involuntary resettlement.
______
36 EBRD/IFC Workers’ Accommodation: Processes and standards, September 2009.
Page 60
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Avoidance Construction Avoidance of impacts has been achieved through the design iterations of the line routing (See Volume 2). As indicated in Section 4.7.1 and as described in Chapter 2 of Volume 2 Project Definition , the Project Components alignments have been selected to avoid as much as possible urban centres and densely populated area. Most parts of the lines are in sparsely populated areas. In order to avoid disruption to existing economic activities in the communities and municipalities crossed by the Project, sections of land permanently and temporarily required for the Project construction will, whenever possible, be unused lands. Agricultural or grazing land used by industries or rural population whose means of production or means of support depend mainly on land will be avoided as much as feasible. Non-used lands will be preferred for the sitting of the towers and for lay-down areas or temporary land needs. For most of the length of each component, in situ tracks already exist. The locations of these tracks will be mapped, and then where possible reused/upgraded to provide access to the powerline routes. The reuse of tracks will significantly reduce the social impacts which would by caused by opening new tracks. These measures are referred in this report as: • [SOC 3] Selection of non-used lands for sitting of towers, and all temporary land needs, as much as possible; • [SOC 4] Selection of temporary construction sites such as lay-down areas or parking areas inside the RoW, as much as possible; • [SOC 5] Reuse of existing paths and tracks for line access, as much as possible (common measure with Biodiversity Assessment Document3.1 ); Operation The avoidance of impacts during the operation will consist of applying the same strategy during construction regarding temporary land needs for maintenance purposes (access track or lay-down areas). The measures proposed are similar to those previously mentioned for the construction phase. Minimisation Construction The Project will adjust the technical design of Components to avoid or at least minimise any physical and economic displacement by optimising the line alignments and the location of the towers. If it is not possible to select unused land for the towers or any other land needs (e.g. new access tracks), the selection of the land to be used by the Project will be done in close coordination with the affected communities to avoid as much as possible impacts on productive lands. The Construction contractors will submit their choices to GSE, and GSE will then validate the selection and construction methods, including any temporary land needs, prior to any construction activity. All land acquisition, either permanent or temporary will be done in compliance with the LARCF and documented for each Project Component in a Resettlement Action Plan (RAP). To further avoid losses and impacts, the clearance of the RoW and construction sites will be announced to the local communities in advance, so that the affected persons have enough time to harvest their crops or salvage their structures located in the ROW. These measures are referred in this report as: • [SOC 6] Consultation with local communities to select sitting on towers, access tracks and temporary land needs to avoid as much as possible impacts on productive lands;
Page 61
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
• [SOC 7] Sign off by GSE of access routes and temporary construction sites prior to construction (common measure with Biodiversity Assessment Document 3.1 ); • [SOC 8] Preparation and implementation of a Resettlement Action Plan for each Component; • [SOC 9] The RoW clearance will be announced in advance to the affected land user to allow them to harvest crops or salvage structures. Operation The minimisation of impacts during the operation will consist in applying the same strategy as during construction regarding temporary land needs for maintenance purposes (access track or lay-down areas). The measures proposed are similar to those previously mentioned for the construction phase. Mitigation and compensation Construction All impacts that will not have been avoided will be compensated and/or mitigated as defined in the LARCF. All compensation will be provided at full replacement cost. Resettlement assistances will be given to all Persons Affected by the Project. The RAP prepared will define if livelihood restoration measures are necessary, and if it is the case, they will be defined with the participation of the affected people, and then implemented. These measures are referred in this report as: • [SOC 10] Compensation of losses at full replacement cost as defined in the LARCF; • [SOC 11] Resettlement assistance and entitlements defined in the LARCF • [SOC 12] Livelihood Restoration wherever necessary as defined in the LARCF Operation During operation, the impacts will be related to maintenance activities, and potential need to use land for temporary purposes. The mitigation measures will be the same as those define above for the construction period.
6.2.3 Interaction with Community infrastructure Avoidance Construction Avoidance of impacts has been achieved through the design iterations of the line routing (See Volume 2 ). As indicated in Section 4.7.1 and in chapter 2 of Volume 2 Project Definition , the Project Component alignments have been selected to avoid as much as possible urban centres and densely populated area. Most parts of the lines are in sparsely populated areas, where only few community infrastructures are located. Operation The avoidance of impacts during the operation phase will consist in applying the measures defined in Section 6.2.1. Minimisation Construction – impacts on public traffic A traffic management plan will be developed to control movement of vehicles and equipment for each Component. This will include the following measures:
Page 62
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
• [SOC 13] Consult and work closely with traffic authorities and neighbouring communities, before construction, to establish a works calendar and determine the optimal timeline for such works, especially conductors’ installation works and the delivery of abnormal loads (e.g. transformers); • [SOC 14] During the conductors’ installation & stringing phase, GSE will position dedicated workers to (i) block and/or control the traffic and (ii) notify drivers to proceed with caution; • [SOC 15] Train all drivers and equipment operators to drive safely; • [SOC 16] Maximise use of existing roads and tracks. Vehicles used for construction activities will move along the already existing roads and corridors as far as possible; • [SOC 17] Enforce strict adapted speed limits for construction vehicles. Construction – impacts on Railways safety One railway is crossed by the Sairme line (Component A), and one other by the Mukuzani loop (Component D). The mitigation measures are indicated in the Document 4.2 . Mitigation Construction – impacts on public traffic The Grievance Mechanism defined in the Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) will be disclosed to the neighbouring communities and implemented, and grievances related to impacts on public traffic will be registered and addressed on a case by case basis. These measures are referred in this report as: • [SOC 18] At each construction site, engagement of neighbouring communities on the Project-related traffic schedules and activities; • [SOC 19] At each construction site, management of neighbouring communities’ grievances regarding construction activities impacts on public traffic. Construction – impacts on Railways safety One railway is crossed by the Sairme line (Component A), and one other by the Mukuzani loop (Component D). The mitigation measures are indicated in the Document 4.2 . Operation - Aircraft Navigation Safety As previously mentioned, proposed OHL routes are located sufficiently far from airports to not affect normal operations. However, GSE will liaise with the Aeronavigation authority (i) to notify the new OHL to be built and (ii) confirm the safety measures eventually necessary. These measures are referred in this report as: • [SOC 20] Engagement with aeronavigation authorities.
6.2.4 Community Health and safety Avoidance Construction As shown in Section 4.7.1, 93 potential sensitive areas have been identified for the Project’s components. Currently, locations of the construction sites, such as construction compounds, access roads or working areas are not defined. Construction activities will be restricted from these areas. GSE will require Contractors to locate the construction sites and access tracks at least 100m from all residential areas as much as possible and wherever feasible.
Page 63
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
This measure is referred in this report as: • [SOC 21] Requirement to locate the construction sites (other than towers locations which have zone of protection distance requirements) and access tracks at least 100m from the residential areas, wherever feasible. The accommodation of the workers will avoid accommodating workers locally in small rural communities (See Volume 8 ESMP ). The accommodation strategy of the Construction Contractors will be to accommodate the workers in urban centres, or at least villages of more than 2,000 inhabitants and with hotels and/or guest houses, and drive them daily to the construction sites. This will avoid impacts from workers accommodation on small rural communities. Table 6.1 below lists the suitable centres where workers can be accommodated. These centres have accommodation capacities. • In remote areas, located more than 1.5-hour drive from the centres listed in Table 6.1, the Construction Contractors will set-up mobile independent accommodation camps. Such cases would arise for the middle of the Sairme line, Component A (between KM35 and KM65) and the Guria line, Component B (between KM14 and KM42). This measure is referred in this report as: • [SOC 22] Requirement to accommodate workers in urban centres or in mobile accommodation camps where construction activities are in remote areas, more than 1.5-hour drive, as defined in the ESMP.
Table 6.1 – Centres suitable for workers’ accommodation
Component and line City Order of magnitude of Accommodation capacities * population*
A – Sairme Line Kutaisi ~ 148,000 410 hotels & Guest houses
Tskaltubo ~ 18,000 62 hotels & Guest houses
A – Tao Line and Akhaltsikhe Akhaltsikhe ~ 17,900 80 hotels & Guest houses extension
B – Guria line Chokhatauri ~ 1,800 5 to 10 hotels & Guest houses
Ozurgeti ~ 14,800 5 to 10 hotels & Guest houses
C1 – Mestia line Zugdidi ~ 43,000 72 hotels & Guest houses
Mestia ~ 2,000 229 hotels & Guest houses
Jvari ~ 4,400 7 hotels & Guest houses
Chuberi Community (no more ~ 950 1 hotel and about 5 to 10 than 50 workers accommodated informal guest houses at once)
C2 Kutaisi ~ 148,000 410 hotels & Guest houses
Lajanuri substation Tskaltubo ~ 18,000 62 hotels & Guest houses Kheledula HPP Line Oni ~ 3,000 10 hotels & Guest houses Lechkhumi Line Ambrolauri ~ 2,000 38 hotels & Guest houses
Page 64
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Component and line City Order of magnitude of Accommodation capacities * population*
New Derchi Line Lentekhi (no more than 50 ~ 950 5 Guest houses workers accommodated at Lajanuri HPP Line once) Oni HPP Line Tsageri ~ 1,900 3 hotels & Guest houses
D – Gurjaani line and Telavi ~ 22,000 142 hotels & Guest houses Akhmeta line Gurjaani ~8,000 8 hotels & Guest houses
Akhmeta ~7,000 16 hotels & Guest houses
* orders of magnitude based on 2014 census ** Source: fieldwork and Booking.com, accessed the 13/12/2018
Operation No further avoidance measure will be undertaken during operation. Minimisation Construction To minimise the risks to community health and safety during the construction activities, the following measures will be applied: • [SOC 23] The construction sites will be fenced; • [SOC 24] Access to construction sites will be restricted to authorised personnel only (workers having received HSE training); • [SOC 25] The Project will respect and apply industrial good practices as highlighted in IFC EHS Guidelines. This includes among others: no operation during night time near inhabited settlements, implementation of noise and dust control measures, low speed limits for the Project’s vehicles in inhabited areas. • [SOC 26] A Workers Code of Conduct will be defined • [SOC 27] The Contractor(s) are contractually required to comply with Georgian, WHO, IFC/World Bank guidelines with respect to construction and operational noise. Operation To minimise the disturbances (noise, dust and vibration) from maintenance activities during operation, the measures defined for construction will be applied for maintenance activities during operation. To minimise the safety risk for the public near the transmission towers, the following measures will be implemented: • [SOC 28] In the event of complaints regarding micro-shocks, conducting objects (e.g. fences or other metallic structures) will be grounded where located near to the transmission lines; • [SOC 29] Prevent access of the general Public near the towers of the transmission line, by use of signs and barriers to prevent anyone from climbing towers (e.g. barbed wire barriers on towers); • [SOC 30] Education/public outreach in the neighbouring communities to prevent public contact with potentially dangerous equipment and to inform and refresh local people regarding restriction zone requirements.
Page 65
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
• [SOC 31] The Contractor(s) are contractually required to comply with ICNIRP guidelines with regard to EMF exposure. Mitigation Construction At each construction site, (i) the schedule of the works and the access restrictions will be communicated to the neighbouring communities, and (ii) regular direct meetings between the HSE construction manager representatives and the neighbouring communities will be undertaken to update them on the progress of the work and to give them the opportunity to voice their concerns. At each construction site, the HSE construction manager will conduct a Community Health and safety assessment of transport routes/working activities to consider community receptors and implement site-specific mitigation measures as necessary (e.g. speed limits at schools; avoiding school opening and closing times; use of flagmen/extra signage). The Design and Construction contractor(s) are contractually required to comply with Georgian, WHO, IFC/World Bank guidelines with respect to construction and operational noise. The impacts of construction noise from the Project will be controlled by the Contractor. The Contractor(s) will use GIP and mitigation measures and would prepare and implement a Noise and Vibration Management Plan. This is described in more detail in the Noise Assessment in Physical Environment Project-wide Assessment , Document 5.1 , Volume 5 . In the event of a noise complaint due to the construction of the Project, GSE will investigate the compliant and work with the Contractor to establish if there is a need to alter construction techniques (e.g. methods and duration of working) and whether there is a need to monitor noise levels at the relevant receptor. Where necessary, appropriate measures will be employed to reduce the noise to within the guideline levels. As explained in Section 6.2.3, the Grievance Mechanism defined in the Stakeholder Engagement Plan will be disclosed to the neighbouring communities and implemented, and grievances related to Community health and safety will be registered and addressed on a case by case basis. These measures are referred in this report as: • [SOC 32] At each construction site, engagement of neighbouring communities on the construction schedules and activities; • [SOC 33] At each construction site, community Health and safety assessment of transport routes/working activities to consider community receptors and implement site-specific mitigation measures as necessary; • [SOC 34] GSE/Implementation Consultant will investigate any noise complaints during the construction of the Project and where required will establish the need to alter the construction methods and determine whether to monitor noise levels; • [SOC 35] At each construction site, management of neighbouring communities’ grievances regarding construction activities. Operation As previously stated, the Project will be designed to meet the relevant noise standards for operating transmission lines and substations. This is a contractual obligation on the Contractor who must provide GSE with a completion certificate demonstrating that noise limits have been met. However, in the event of a noise complaint, GSE will investigate the noise complaint, undertake monitoring if deemed necessary and where appropriate implement measures to reduce the noise at the specific receptor. This measure is referred in this report as:
Page 66
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
• [SOC 36] Any complaints regarding operation noise will be investigated and, if appropriate, noise monitoring will be undertaken to establish compliance or not with the guidelines and to determine the need for additional noise mitigation.
6.2.5 Occupational Health and Safety The Construction Contractors will develop an Occupational health and safety plan for the construction activities. The detailed requirements of these plans are outlined in the Volume 8 – ESMP . These Occupational Health and Safety Plans will comply with the Georgian legal requirements, and the Occupational health and safety mitigation measures defined in the Environmental, Health, and Safety Guidelines for Electric Power Transmission and Distribution of the World Bank Group 37 . More details are given in the Volume 8 ESMP . The Occupational health and safety plans for construction and operation will include a monitoring program. The occupational health and safety performance should be evaluated against internationally published exposure guidelines, such as Indicative Occupational Exposure Limit Values published by European Union member states or recognised GIP. Examples for Minimum Working Distances for Trained Employees from Alternating current and occupational exposure to electric and magnetic fields are given in Table 6.2 and Table 6.3.
Table 6.2 - Alternating Current - Minimum Working Distances for Trained Employees Voltage Range (phase to phase – Kilovolts) Minimum Working and Clear Hot Stick Distance (meters)
2.1 to 15 0.6
15.1 to 35 0.71
35.1 to 46 0.76
46.1 to 72.5 0.91
72.6 to 121 1.01
138 to 145 1.06
161 to 169 1.11
230 to 242 1.5
345 to 362 2.13
500 to 552 3.35
700 to 765 4.5
Source: IFC 2007, Environmental, Health, and Safety Guidelines for Electric Power Transmission and Distribution
______
37 http://www.ifc.org/ehsguidelines
Page 67
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Table 6.3 - ICNIRP exposure limits for occupational exposure to electric and magnetic fields Frequency Electric Field (V/m) Magnetic Field (µT)
50 Hz 10,000 500
60Hz 8,300 415
Source: International Commission on Non -Ionizing Radiation Protection 1998
These measures are referred in the report as: • [SOC 37] Requirement to develop and implement Occupational Health and Safety Plans compliant with international standards (World Bank group)
6.2.6 Cultural Heritage Avoidance Construction Avoidance of impacts has been achieved through the design iterations of the line routing (See Volume 2 ). As indicated in Section 4.7.1, the Project Components lines have been selected to avoid as much as possible impacts on cultural heritage elements. Four elements of cultural heritage registered by the NACHP elements and registered by the NACHP as immovable monuments of cultural heritage are located within 300m of the transmission lines (between 250m and 300m). The transmission line towers must not encroach into their visual protection perimeter of 300m. It would be possible to avoid encroaching into the visual protection perimeter, by siting the towers outside of the 300m visual protection areas. In addition, the following measures will be applied to avoid impacts on cultural heritage elements: • [SOC 38] The sitting of the towers will be designed to avoid the identified cultural heritage elements. • [SOC 39] As much as feasible, the towers will be located at least 300m away from any known cultural heritage element registered by NACHP as an immovable monument of cultural heritage. • [SOC 40] As much as feasible, the towers will be located at least 500m away from any known cultural heritage element registered by NACHP as immovable monument of cultural heritage of national significance. • [SOC 41] The selection of access tracks and construction areas will take into account the Cultural heritage elements and avoid impacts as much as possible. • As defined in Section 6.2.1, [SOC 5] existing tracks will be used as much as possible for construction activities. Operation The same principles for selection and use of access tracks will apply during operation for maintenance works. Minimisation Construction • [SOC 42] In each Community, the Contractor will consult the neighbouring communities to confirm identification of all cultural heritage elements of local value and optimise the design.
Page 68
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Operation The same principles will apply during operation for maintenance work. Mitigation Construction The following measures will be applied to mitigate the impacts on cultural heritage elements during construction: • [SOC 43] Archaeological works will be conducted on the identified archaeological sites in the Right of Way and at any construction site prior to construction. • [SOC 44] A Chance find procedure will be defined and applied by each Construction Contractor. • [SOC 45] The Workers Code of Conduct of the Construction contractors (see Volume 8 - ESMP ) will include measures regarding respect for the beliefs and customs of the populations and community relations in general, and specific responsibilities related to any cultural heritage encountered during construction. • [SOC 46] All cultural heritage elements of local value (e.g. other than the monuments registered by the National Agency for Cultural Heritage Protection) located less than 50m to a construction site will be protected from potential damage due to construction methods. This will apply to cemeteries. • [SOC 47] The Construction Contractors will be contractually required to not block accesses to places of worship or cultural heritage elements of local values (such as cemeteries or graves) throughout the construction phase as much as possible, taking into consideration safety issues. Operation The mitigation measures defined for construction will apply for maintenance work during operation.
Page 69
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Project-wide Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Commitments
Impact Producing factor Phases Assessment of significance without mitigation or compensation Commitment s Management Action where the mitigation or High Hi Moderate M Low Lo Key Mitigation, Compensation or Management compensation measure is measures
addressed in the ESMP [+] positive, [-] negative on Predicted Predicted Likelihood, Magnitude, Extent, Duration Operation Operation residual impacts impacts residual Constructi
Construction of OHL
Workforce X • Lo [+] Temporary. [SOC 1] Local Recruitment Plans and target of 20% Lo [+] ESMP Document 8.1, of local workers employed during construction; Temporary employment opportunities for locals. Provision of an Section 5.4.1 income source for workers and their families contributing to their wellbeing and enhancing their quality of life.
Local business X Lo [+] Temporary • [SOC 2] Accommodation Plans signed-off by GSE Lo [+] ESMP Document 8. 1, development and Supply for each construction contractor Section 6.3.1 chain opportunities Opportunities for companies at the national, and possibly regional, level to supply goods and services. Local purchases of goods and services directly by the Project and workers during construction will foster the local economy.
Presence of OHL X M [+] Permanent. Not applicable M [+]
The Project will Improve reliability of the existing network at a regional and national scale, satisfy the growing demand for electricity and increase export of power.
Land affected by the Project
Land acquisition X Hi [-] Permanent. • [SOC 8] Preparation and implementation of a Lo ESMP Document 8.1, Resettlement Action Plan for each Component; Section 6.6.1 About 16 households potentially physically resettled. • [SOC 10] Compensation of losses at full replacement cost as defined in the LARCF;
• [SOC 11] Resettlement assistance and entitlements defined in the LARCF
Page 70
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Impact Producing factor Phases Assessment of significance without mitigation or compensation Commitment s Management Action where the mitigation or High Hi Moderate M Low Lo Key Mitigation, Compensation or Management compensation measure is measures
addressed in the ESMP [+] positive, [-] negative on Predicted Predicted Likelihood, Magnitude, Extent, Duration Operation Operation residual impacts impacts residual Constructi
• [SOC 12] Livelihood Restoration wherever necessary as defined in the LARCF
Land acquisition X Lo to M [-] Permanent and Temporary. • [SOC 3] Selection of non-used lands for sitting of Lo ESMP Document 8.1, towers, and all temporary land needs, as much as Section 6.6.1 an Document Potential economic displacement. possible; 8.2 Sections 3.2.1 and 3.8.1
About 4,500 land plots potentially affected by the OHL RoW • [SOC 4] Selection of temporary construction sites such as lay-down areas or parking areas inside the RoW, as much as possible;
• [SOC 5] Reuse of existing paths and tracks for line access, as much as possible (common measure with Biodiversity Assessment Document3.1);
• [SOC 6] Consultation with local communities to select sitting on towers, access tracks and temporary land needs to avoid as much as possible impacts on productive lands;
• [SOC 7] Sign off by GSE of access routes and temporary construction sites prior to construction (common measure with Biodiversity Assessment Document 3.1);
• [SOC 8] Preparation and implementation of a Resettlement Action Plan for each Component;
• [SOC 9] The RoW clearance will be announced in advance to the affected land user to allow them to harvest crops or salvage structures.
• [SOC 10] Compensation of losses at full replacement cost as defined in the LARCF;
• [SOC 11] Resettlement assistance and entitlements defined in the LARCF
Page 71
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Impact Producing factor Phases Assessment of significance without mitigation or compensation Commitment s Management Action where the mitigation or High Hi Moderate M Low Lo Key Mitigation, Compensation or Management compensation measure is measures
addressed in the ESMP [+] positive, [-] negative on Predicted Predicted Likelihood, Magnitude, Extent, Duration Operation Operation residual impacts impacts residual Constructi
• [SOC 12] Livelihood Restoration wherever necessary as defined in the LARCF
Interaction with Community Infrastructure – impacts on public traffic
Construction activities X Lo [-] Temporary • Traffic Management Plan will be developed by Lo ESMP Document 8.1 each Construction contractor Section 5.4.8, Document Project’s vehicles traffic, The traffic associated with the Project construction 8.2 3.9.2 and Document delivery of abnormal activities is likely to be occasional, short-term and low in • [SOC 13] Consult and work closely with traffic 8.3, Section 3.5.1 loads, and the stringing numbers, authorities and neighbouring communities, before of the conductors construction, to establish a works calendar and Abnormal loads will be will be limited to the installation of determine the optimal timeline for such works, the power transformers at some of the substations: especially conductors’ installation works and the delivery of abnormal loads (e.g. transformers); • Four abnormal loads for the substation in Ozurgeti (Component B); • [SOC 14] During the conductors’ installation & stringing phase, GSE will position dedicated • Nine in Lajanuri (Component C2); workers to (i) block and/or control the traffic and (ii) notify drivers to proceed with caution; • One in Gurjaani and one in Telavi (Component D). • [SOC 15] Train all drivers and equipment operators to drive safely; Local increased Project vehicle traffic may cause • [SOC 16] Maximise use of existing roads and • Deterioration of local roads by heavy goods vehicles; tracks. Vehicles used for construction activities will move along the already existing roads and • Delays to and obstruction of local traffic, especially during corridors as far as possible; abnormal loads; • [SOC 17] Enforce strict adapted speed limits for • Temporary road closures at the OHL crossings locations, for the construction vehicles. time needed to string the conductors. • [SOC 18] At each construction site, engagement of neighbouring communities on the Project-related traffic schedules and activities;
Page 72
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Impact Producing factor Phases Assessment of significance without mitigation or compensation Commitment s Management Action where the mitigation or High Hi Moderate M Low Lo Key Mitigation, Compensation or Management compensation measure is measures
addressed in the ESMP [+] positive, [-] negative on Predicted Predicted Likelihood, Magnitude, Extent, Duration Operation Operation residual impacts impacts residual Constructi
• [SOC 19] At each construction site, management of neighbouring communities’ grievances regarding construction activities impacts on public traffic.
Maintenance activities X No impact expected during operation None applicable none during operation
Interaction with Community Infrastructure – Railways safety
Conductors installation X Negligible [-] Temporary • See D ocument 4.2 negligibl e 2 railways potentially affected by the northern end of the Sairme line, Component A and Component D Potential very short temporary interruption of rail traffic due to conductors’ installation and stinging .
Interaction with Community Infrastructure – Aircraft Navigation Safety
Presence of the OHL and X Negligible [-] Permanent • [SOC 20] Engagement with aeronavigation negligibl ESMP Document 8.2, towers authorities. e Section 5.4.1 Any impact on aircraft safety is very unlikely. The impact significance is considered low for all airports close to the Project, except Telavi airfield, for which the impact significance is considered negligible. (Telavi airfield is not operating regularly and Component D will only rehabilitate existing line, hence it will not create new risks)
Community health and safety – Noise, dust, and vibration from projec t activities and machinery
Project activities and X Lo [-] temporary. • [SOC 21] Requirement to locate the Lo ESMP Document 8. 1, machinery during construction sites (other than towers locations Sections 5.3.1, 5.4.5, 5.2.2, construction Potential to affect the health of nearby resident’s who are located which have zone of protection distance .2.8, and 5.3.9 in close proximity to the working areas (within 500m). requirements) and access tracks at least 100m from the residential areas.
Page 73
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Impact Producing factor Phases Assessment of significance without mitigation or compensation Commitment s Management Action where the mitigation or High Hi Moderate M Low Lo Key Mitigation, Compensation or Management compensation measure is measures
addressed in the ESMP [+] positive, [-] negative on Predicted Predicted Likelihood, Magnitude, Extent, Duration Operation Operation residual impacts impacts residual Constructi
• [SOC 23] The construction sites will be fenced;
• [SOC 24] Access to construction sites will be restricted to authorised personnel only (workers having received HSE training);
• [SOC 25] The Project will respect and apply industrial good practices as highlighted in IFC EHS Guidelines.
• [SOC 26] A Workers Code of Conduct will be defined
• [SOC 27] The Contractor(s) are contractually required to comply with Georgian, WHO, IFC/World Bank guidelines with respect to construction and operational noise.
Maintenance activities X Lo [-] Temporary. • Same measures as during construction Lo ESMP Document 8.1, during operation Section 6.12.2 Potential to affect the health of nearby resident’s who are located • [SOC 36] Any complaints regarding operation in close proximity to the working areas for the maintenance noise will be investigated and, if appropriate, activities. noise monitoring will be undertaken to establish compliance or not with the guidelines and to determine the need for additional noise mitigation.
Noise from the conductors X Negligible [-] Permanent. [SOC 36] Any complaints regarding operation noise negligibl ESMP Document 8.1, and the substation. will be investigated and, if appropriate, noise e Section 6.12.2 The levels of noise produced will be below WHO and IFC monitoring will be undertaken to establish standards, and will be noticeable only in the Right of Way compliance or not with the guidelines and to determine the need for additional noise mitigation.
Community health and safety – Adverse community health and safety impacts due to introduced workforce
Page 74
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Impact Producing factor Phases Assessment of significance without mitigation or compensation Commitment s Management Action where the mitigation or High Hi Moderate M Low Lo Key Mitigation, Compensation or Management compensation measure is measures
addressed in the ESMP [+] positive, [-] negative on Predicted Predicted Likelihood, Magnitude, Extent, Duration Operation Operation residual impacts impacts residual Constructi
Presence of workforce Lo to Hi [-] temporary. • [SOC 22] Requirement to accommodate negligibl ESMP Document 8.1, workers in urban centres or in mobile e Section 5.4.3 The number of workers employed by the Project on each accommodation camps where construction construction site would be relatively small (between activities are in remote areas, more than 1.5- approximately 10 to 50 on transmission lines or 100 at substations hour drive, as defined in the ESMP. at one time). The magnitude of impact will be function on the importance of the number of workers compared to the total population of the local communities in which they are accommodated. The impact magnitude will therefore be greater in small communities than in bigger ones. Therefore, before any mitigation, the impact significance is considered low in urban centres, and could be medium to high in rural, remote, small communities. During operation, there will not be any impact
Community health and safety – risk of accidents
Construction activities X Lo [-] Temporary. • [SOC 23] The construction sites will be fenced; Lo ESMP Document 8.1, Section 5.3.1, 5.4.5, 5.2.2 The construction activities at each construction site will be short- • [SOC 24] Access to construction sites will be and 6.12.2 term. The traffic associated with the Project construction restricted to authorised personnel only activities is likely to be occasional, short-term and low in numbers, (workers having received HSE training); resulting in impacts of negligible magnitude. • [SOC 25] The Project will respect and apply The likelihood of accident is unlikely, as most of the lines industrial good practices as highlighted in IFC alignment have been optimised to avoid inhabited areas as much EHS Guidelines. as possible. • [SOC 32] At each construction site, engagement of neighbouring communities on the construction schedules and activities;
• [SOC 33] At each construction site, community Health and safety assessment of transport routes/working activities to consider community receptors and implement site- specific mitigation measures as necessary;
Page 75
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Impact Producing factor Phases Assessment of significance without mitigation or compensation Commitment s Management Action where the mitigation or High Hi Moderate M Low Lo Key Mitigation, Compensation or Management compensation measure is measures
addressed in the ESMP [+] positive, [-] negative on Predicted Predicted Likelihood, Magnitude, Extent, Duration Operation Operation residual impacts impacts residual Constructi
• [SOC 34] GSE/Implementation Consultant will investigate any noise complaints during the construction of the Project and where required will establish the need to alter the construction methods and determine whether to monitor noise levels;
• [SOC 35] At each construction site, management of neighbouring communities’ grievances regarding construction activities.
OHL, towers, Substations, X Lo [-] Permanent. • [SOC 28] In the event of complaints regarding Lo ESMP Document 8. 1, maintenance activities micro-shocks, conducting objects (e.g. fences or Section 5.4.5 and Residents or cattle could get exposed to hazardous materials or other metallic structures) will be grounded where Document 8.2 Section get injured in contact with heavy equipment or live power lines. located near to the transmission lines; 5.7.1 and 3.8.2
the lines’ alignments have been selected to avoid as much as • [SOC 29] Prevent access of the general Public near possible the residential areas, so the receptors will be relatively the towers of the transmission line, by use of signs limited and barriers to prevent anyone from climbing The likelihood of such accident is unlikely. towers (e.g. barbed wire barriers on towers); • [SOC 30] Education/public outreach in the neighbouring communities to prevent public contact with potentially dangerous equipment and to inform and refresh local people regarding restriction zone requirements.
Community health and safety – electric and magnetic fields
Presence of the OHL X Negligible [-] Permanent. • [SOC 31] The Contractor(s) are contractually negligibl ESMP Document 8.2, required to comply with ICNIRP guidelines with e Section 3.2.1 As no building will be allowed in the Rights of Way, the exposure regard to EMF exposure. of neighbouring communities to EMF is likely to concern only those conducting agricultural activities in the Right of Way. As the Project Company commits on all its projects to comply with the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) Guidelines for Limiting Exposure to Time-
Page 76
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Impact Producing factor Phases Assessment of significance without mitigation or compensation Commitment s Management Action where the mitigation or High Hi Moderate M Low Lo Key Mitigation, Compensation or Management compensation measure is measures
addressed in the ESMP [+] positive, [-] negative on Predicted Predicted Likelihood, Magnitude, Extent, Duration Operation Operation residual impacts impacts residual Constructi
Varying Electric, Magnetic and Electromagnetic Fields as recommended by both the IFC and European Union, no likely significant impacts from EMF will be experienced.
Occupational health and safety
Construction activities X M [-] Temporary • [SOC 37] Requirement to develop and implement Lo ESMP Document 8.1, Occupational Health and Safety Plans compliant Section 5.4.2
Workers will be exposed to the following risks during construction with international standards (World Bank group) activities:
• Working with live power lines, risks of electrocution
• Working at height on poles and structures
• Exposure to EMF
• Exposure to chemicals
Maintenance and X M [-] Temporary • [SOC 37] Requirement to develop and implement Lo ESMP Document 8.1, operation Occupational Health and Safety Plans compliant Section 5.4.2 Workers will be exposed to the following risks during with international standards (World Bank group) maintenance activities
• Working with live power lines, risks of electrocution
• Working at height on poles and structures
• Exposure to EMF
• Exposure to chemicals
Material Cultural heritage
Earth works for temporary X Lo Permanent. • [SOC 38] The sitting of the towers will be designed Lo ESMP Document 8.1, worksites to avoid the identified cultural heritage elements. Section 5.3.11, 6.5.1, 5.2.8 44 Cultural heritage elements of local importance are located in and 5.4.5 and Document Land requirement for the 500m corridor. 8.2 Section 3.2.1 pylon and substations (permanent land needs) 2 are registered by NACHP.
Page 77
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Impact Producing factor Phases Assessment of significance without mitigation or compensation Commitment s Management Action where the mitigation or High Hi Moderate M Low Lo Key Mitigation, Compensation or Management compensation measure is measures
addressed in the ESMP [+] positive, [-] negative on Predicted Predicted Likelihood, Magnitude, Extent, Duration Operation Operation residual impacts impacts residual Constructi
Unknown archaeological artefacts are likely to be discovered • [SOC 39] As much as feasible, the towers will be during some earthworks located at least 300m away from any known cultural heritage element registered by NACHP as an immovable monument of cultural heritage.
• [SOC 40] As much as feasible, the towers will be located at least 500m away from any known cultural heritage element registered by NACHP as immovable monument of cultural heritage of national significance.
• [SOC 41] The selection of access tracks and construction areas will take into account the Cultural heritage elements and avoid impacts as much as possible.
• As defined in Section 6.2.1, [SOC 5] existing tracks will be used as much as possible for construction activities.
• [SOC 42] In each Community, the Contractor will consult the neighbouring communities to confirm identification of all cultural heritage elements of local value and optimise the design.
• [SOC 5] Reuse of existing paths and tracks for line access, as much as possible (common measure with Biodiversity Assessment Document3.1 );
• [SOC 43] Archaeological works will be conducted on the identified archaeological sites in the Right of Way and at any construction site prior to construction.
• [SOC 44] A Chance find procedure will be defined and applied by each Construction Contractor.
Page 78
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
Impact Producing factor Phases Assessment of significance without mitigation or compensation Commitment s Management Action where the mitigation or High Hi Moderate M Low Lo Key Mitigation, Compensation or Management compensation measure is measures
addressed in the ESMP [+] positive, [-] negative on Predicted Predicted Likelihood, Magnitude, Extent, Duration Operation Operation residual impacts impacts residual Constructi
• [SOC 45] The Workers Code of Conduct of the Construction contractors (see Volume 8 - ESMP ) will include measures regarding respect for the beliefs and customs of the populations and community relations in general, and specific responsibilities related to any cultural heritage encountered during construction.
• [SOC 46] All cultural heritage elements of local value (e.g. other than the monuments registered by the National Agency for Cultural Heritage Protection) located less than 50m to a construction site will be protected from potential damage due to construction methods. This will apply to cemeteries.
• [SOC 47] The Construction Contractors will be contractually required to not block accesses to places of worship or cultural heritage elements of local values (such as cemeteries or graves) throughout the construction phase as much as possible, taking into consideration safety issues.
Maintenance activities X Lo [-] Permanent. • Same measures as during construction Lo 41 Cultural elements of [national] and [local] importance are located in the 500m corridor. 4 elements registered by NACHP are within 300M of one OHL Unknown archaeological artefacts are likely to be discovered during some earthworks
Page 79
Georgian State Electrosystem (GSE) Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SLR Ref No:901.12.1 Volume 4 Social, Document 4.1 Project-wide Assessment July 2019
References
World Bank (2018) Georgia country economic Update. Making the Recovery Sustainable., Country Economic Update. HEIDHUES F., BRUNTRUP M., (2003). “Subsistence Agriculture in Development: Its Role in Processes of Structural Change”, In: ABELE S. & FROHBERG K., Subsistence Agriculture in Central and Eastern Europe: How to Break the Vicious Circle? , Institute of Agricultural Development in Central and Eastern Europe (IAMO), Vol.22, pp. 1-28. GOGODZE J., KAN I., KIMHI A. (2007). Land reform and Rural Well Being in the Republic of Georgia: 1996-2003, Discussion Paper n°1.07, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. IFC (2007) “Environmental, Health, and Safety Guidelines for Electric Power Transmission and Distribution ” http://www.ifc.org/ehsguidelines World Health Organization (1998). Electromagnetic fields and public health: extremely low frequency (ELF) Fact Sheet . Available online at: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs205/en . Kvitsinadze, L., D. Tvildiani, and G. Pkhakadze. (2010) « HIV/AIDS Prevalence in the Southern Caucasus ». Georgian Medical News, no 189 (December 2010): 26 36. KfW Development Bank (2016) Sustainability Guideline: Assessment of Environmental, Social and Climate Performance: Principles and Process Stvilia K., Khatuna Todadze K. , Nizharadze G. (2010), HIV and AIDS in Georgia: a socio-cultural approach, in UNESCO (2005) HIV and AIDS in the Caucasus Region : A Socio-Cultural Approach. UNAIDS (2018), data on AIDS epidemic http://aidsinfo.unaids.org/ UNESCO (2018).World Heritage List. https://whc.unesco.org/en/list UNESCO (2018). Georgia and the 2003 Convention on Intangible Cultural Heritage https://ich.unesco.org/en/state/georgia-GE Georgia on Resolution of the Council of Europe’s Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, #1938-IIs, 13 October 2005 Wheatley, J. (2006). Implementing the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities in Georgia: A Feasibility Study. ECMI Working paper #28. Ministry of Internally Displaced Persons from the Occupied Territories, Accommodation and Refugees of Georgia (2014), Number of Registered IDPs-Statistics by Region http://mra.gov.ge/eng/static/55 World Health Organization. 1998. Electromagnetic fields and public health: extremely low frequency (ELF) Fact Sheet. Available online at: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs205/en . International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection. « Guidelines for limiting exposure to time- varying electric, magnetic, and electromagnetic fields (up to 300 ghz) ». Health Physics 74, nᵒ 4 (1998): 494 ‑ 522; cited in « Environmental, Health, and Safety Guidelines for Electric Power Transmission and Distribution ». International finance Corporation, 2007. EBRD/IFC Workers’ Accommodation: Processes and standards, September 2009. EBRD. ‘Environmental and Social Policy’, 2014. National Statistics Office of Georgia ( www.geostat.ge ) available public statistics.
Page 80
APPENDIX A
List of interviews
# Date Sector / Nature of stakeholder Village / Location Topics / issues discussed Number of interviewees Men Women Women
Component A
1 8th of May Representative of Opshkviti Tskhaltubo Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 5 3 2 Representative of Patriketi heritage/Social organisation and women’s Representative of Mukhiani position Representative of Gumbra Representative of Maghlaki
2 9th of May Driver/Farmer Tskhaltubo/Patriketi Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 1 1 0 heritage/Social organisation and women’s position
3 9th of May Jurist/Farmer Tskhaltubo/Patriketi Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 1 1 0 heritage/Social organisation and women’s position
4 9th of May Farmer Tskhaltubo/Patriketi Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 1 1 0 heritage/Social organisation and women’s position
5 10 th of May Teacher Vani/Amaghleba Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 3 1 2 Unemployed/Farmer heritage/Social organisation and women’s Unemployed/Farmer position
6 11th of May Head of Administrative Service Vani Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 3 3 0 Head of economic and municipal heritage/Social organisation and women's property management service position Head of health care and social service in municipality
7 12th of May Driver/Farmer Akhaltsikhe/Agara Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 2 2 0 Unemployed/Farmer heritage/Social organisation and women's position
# Date Sector / Nature of stakeholder Village / Location Topics / issues discussed Number of interviewees Men Women Women
8 12th of May Farmer Akhaltsikhe/Fersa Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 1 1 0 heritage/Social organisation and women's position
9 13th of May Teacher Akhaltsikhe/Sviri Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 1 1 0 heritage/Social organisation and women's position
10 14th of May Head of Economic Department Akhaltsikhe Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 3 1 2 Head of Social Services heritage/Social organisation and women's Specialist in social services position
11 13th of May Builder Akhaltsikhe/Sviri Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 1 1 0 heritage/Social organisation and women's position
12 15th of May First Deputy of Mayor Adigeni Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 2 2 0 Head of property management service heritage/Social organisation and women's position
13 30th of June Unemployed Adigeni/Borough Adigeni Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 1 1 0 heritage/Social organisation and women's position
14 30th of June Cheese producer Adigeni/Borough Adigeni Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 1 1 0 heritage/Social organisation and women's position
15 30th of June Farmer/pension Adigeni/Borough Adigeni Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 1 1 0 heritage/Social organisation and women's position
# Date Sector / Nature of stakeholder Village / Location Topics / issues discussed Number of interviewees Men Women Women
16 30th of June Farmer/pension Adigeni/Borough Adigeni Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 1 1 0 heritage/Social organisation and women's position
Component B
17 10th of May Voice Operator/Farmer Ozurgeti/Likhauri Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 2 2 0 Unemployed/Farmer heritage/Social organisation and women's position
18 10th of May Representative of Ozurgeti in Ozurgeti Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 2 1 1 economic sphere heritage/Social organisation and women's Superior of health care and sociology position in Ozurgeti
19 10th of May Jurist/Apiarist Chokhatauri/Gzevi Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 1 1 0 heritage/Social organisation and women's position
20 Farmer/pension Chokhatauri/Satyeo Fondi Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 1 0 1 heritage/Social organisation and women's position
21 28th of June Farmer Chokhatauri/Satyeo Fondi Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 1 1 0 heritage/Social organisation and women's position
22 28th of June Farmer Chokhatauri/Satyeo Fondi Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 1 1 0 heritage/Social organisation and women's position
# Date Sector / Nature of stakeholder Village / Location Topics / issues discussed Number of interviewees Men Women Women
23 27th of June Mayors right hand Chokhatauri Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 3 3 0 Head of Social departament heritage/Social organisation and women's Specialist of Property Management position services
24 27th of June Teacher Chokhatauri/Khidistavi Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 2 1 1 Mayors Representative heritage/Social organisation and women's position
Component C1
25 24th of June English Teacher Mestia/Chuberi Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 1 0 1 heritage/Social organisation and women's position
26 25 of June Beekeeper Mestia/Esteri Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 1 1 0 heritage/Social organisation and women's position
27 25 of June Farmer/pension Mestia/Latali Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 1 1 0 heritage/Social organisation and women's position
28 24th of June Farmer/pension Mestia/Chuberi Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 1 0 1 heritage/Social organisation and women's position
29 26 of June First deputy Mayor Mestia Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 2 1 1 Head of Economic Service heritage/Social organisation and women's position
30 23 of June Engineer/Guard Mestia/Chuberi Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 1 1 0 heritage/Social organisation and women's position
# Date Sector / Nature of stakeholder Village / Location Topics / issues discussed Number of interviewees Men Women Women
Component C2
31 18th of June Head of Social Department Ambroxauli Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 2 1 1 Head of Economic/Property heritage/Social organisation and women's management services position
32 Farmer (production) Gumbra Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 1 0 1 heritage/Social organisation and women's position
33 17th of June Farmer/Unemployed Tybuli/Jvarisa Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 2 1 1 Farmer/Unemployed heritage/Social organisation and women's position
34 18th of June Farmer/Unemployed Ambroxauli/Tsesi Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 1 1 0 heritage/Social organisation and women's position
35 20th of June Teacher Lentekhi/Khopuri Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 1 0 1 heritage/Social organisation and women's position
36 19th of June Head of Property management Oni Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 2 2 0 services heritage/Social organisation and women's Head of Economic Department position
37 18th of June Farmer/pension Ambroxauli/Tsesi Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 1 1 1 heritage/Social organisation and women's position
38 23 of June Construction worker Walenjixa/Jvari Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 1 1 0 heritage/Social organisation and women's position
# Date Sector / Nature of stakeholder Village / Location Topics / issues discussed Number of interviewees Men Women Women
39 23 of June Pension Walenjixa/Jvari Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 1 1 0 heritage/Social organisation and women's position
40 21 of June Economic/Property Management Tsageri Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 1 1 0 departament heritage/Social organisation and women's position
41 22 of June Head of Social Departament Lentekhi Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 2 1 1 Head of Economic Departament heritage/Social organisation and women's position
42 16th of June Farmer/Unemployed Tskhaltubo/Opurchkheti Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 1 0 1 heritage/Social organisation and women's position
43 17th of June Unemployed Tskhaltubo/Rioni Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 2 2 0 Unemployed heritage/Social organisation and women's position
44 17th of June Farmer/Unemployed Tskhaltubo/Dghnorisa Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 1 1 0 heritage/Social organisation and women's position
45 15th of June Unemployed Tskhaltubo/Gumbra Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 2 2 0 Unemployed heritage/Social organisation and women's position
46 16th of June Farmer/Unemployed Tskhaltubo/Rioni Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 1 1 0 heritage/Social organisation and women's position
# Date Sector / Nature of stakeholder Village / Location Topics / issues discussed Number of interviewees Men Women Women
47 19th of June Farmer/pension Tsageri/Alpana Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 1 0 1 heritage/Social organisation and women's position
48 20th of June Farmer/pension Tsageri/Orbeli Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 2 1 1 Farmer/pension heritage/Social organisation and women's position
49 15th of June Farmer/pension Tskhaltubo/Gumbra Land tenure/Land use/Cultural heritage/Social organisation and women's position
Component D
50 12 of June Head of Economic Department Gurjaani Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 3 1 2 Specialist of Privatisation Department heritage/Social organisation and women's Head of Foreign Relatons position
51 14th of June Farmer Telavi Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 1 0 1 heritage/Social organisation and women's position
52 12 of June Farmer (production) Gurjaani/Vazisubani Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 1 1 0 heritage/Social organisation and women's position
53 14th of June Head of Property management Akhmeta Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 2 0 2 services heritage/Social organisation and women's Head of Social/Healthcare Department position
54 13th of June Specialist Of Economic Department Telavi Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 3 2 1 Head of Social/Healthcare Department heritage/Social organisation and women's Specialist of Property Management position services
# Date Sector / Nature of stakeholder Village / Location Topics / issues discussed Number of interviewees Men Women Women
55 13th of June Farmer/Unemployed Telavi/Kvemo Khodasheni Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 1 1 0 heritage/Social organisation and women's position
56 11th of June Farmer Gurjaani/Mukuzani Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 1 1 0 heritage/Social organisation and women's position
57 12 of June Guard Gurjaani/Kvemo Khodasheni Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 1 1 0 heritage/Social organisation and women's position
58 13th of June Farmer Gurjaani Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 1 0 1 heritage/Social organisation and women's position
59 13th of June NGO employee (World Vision) Telavi/Kisiskhvi Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 1 1 0 heritage/Social organisation and women's position
60 14th of June Farmer/Pension Akhmeta Land tenure/Land use/Cultural 1 1 heritage/Social organisation and women's position
EUROPEAN OFFICES United Kingdom .
AYLESBURY LEEDS T: +44 (0)1844 337380 T: +44 (0)113 258 0650
LONDON BELFAST T: +44 (0)203 805 6418 T: +44 (0)28 9073 2493
MAIDSTONE BRADFORD-ON-AVON T: +44 (0)1622 609242 T: +44 (0)1225 309400 MANCHESTER BRISTOL T: +44 (0)161 872 7564 T: +44 (0)117 906 4280 NEWCASTLE UPON TYNE
T: +44 (0)191 261 1966 CAMBRIDGE
T: + 44 (0)1223 813805 NOTTINGHAM
T: +44 (0)115 964 7280 CARDIFF
T: +44 (0)29 2049 1010 SHEFFIELD T: +44 (0)114 245 5153
CHELMSFORD SHREWSBURY T: +44 (0)1245 392170 T: +44 (0)1743 23 9250
EDINBURGH T: +44 (0)131 335 6830 STAFFORD T: +44 (0)1785 241755 EXETER T: + 44 (0)1392 490152 STIRLING T: +44 (0)1786 239900 GLASGOW T: +44 (0)141 353 5037 WORCESTER T: +44 (0)1905 751310 GUILDFORD T: +44 (0)1483 889800 Ireland France DUBLIN GRENOBLE T: + 353 (0)1 296 4667 T: +33 (0)6 23 37 14 14