English Translation: ANA NEMSITSVERIDZE-DANIELS

ACROSS THE GEORGIAN-ABKHAZ CONFLICT DIVIDE:

ADDRESSING THE NEEDS OF LOCALS IN SAMEGRELO-ZEMO SVANETI

Тbilisi 2013 This publication includes two reports which were prepared within the project “Across Georgian-Abkhaz conflict divide: Addressing the needs of locals (Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti)” implemented by the Georgian Foundation for Strategic and international Studies and supported by the Conflict Prevention Pool of the UK Government.

Project coordinator: ARCHIL GEGESHIDZE Project assistant: KETEVAN EMUKHVARI Editing: JEFFREY MORSKI English translation: ANA NEMSITSVERIDZE-DANIELS

Copies Printed: 100

The contents of this document are the sole responsibility of the Georgian Foundation for Strategic and International Studies and can under no circumstances be regarded as reflecting the position of the government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Ana Diakonidze

SUMMARY

Research findings point towards a rather poor economic state of the population across the Administrative Border Line (ABL) with 75% identifying themselves as “poor” or in the “lower middle class.” This is also confirmed by the assessment based upon the Objective Poverty Index (OPI) that estimates 63% of the respondents to be earning an average monthly income of less than GEL 300 per month which is insufficient for even food and clothing.

There is a clear rural-urban divide when it comes to economic prospects. Most of the households which belong to the “well-off” group live in Zugdidi. Main income sources in urban locations are regular/ monthly salaries and revenues from business and trade activities as opposed to those from agricultural produce and social allowances in the villages.

This considered, it is not surprising that unemployment (40%) and a lack of social protection/poverty (30%) have been identified as the top problems. Apart from economic difficulties, the population is also 1 very much concerned about political issues such as Georgian-Abkhaz and Georgian-Russian relations.

Overall, the population across the ABL is not very happy about life. More than a fifth report having a permanent feeling of discomfort which turned out to be significantly associated with their income status. It should be noted, however, that the younger generation is attaching less acuteness to the abovementioned problems and generally feels more comfortable about their lives. Main concerns about the future are increased difficulties in finding jobs/earning opportunities (31%) and a worsening of the situation with regard to access to quality education and health care (20%). Despite this, the overwhelming majority (93%) is rather optimistic about a positive future.

People along the border line can be grouped into three clusters when it comes to their general well- being and feeling of comfort. More precisely, we can distinguish between the first cluster of “happy people” (28%) who are predominantly wealthy, highly-educated locals (non-IDPs) aged 25-37 years who feel very comfortable about their lives and look with high hopes at their future. The second cluster is a group of “depressed but optimistic” people (30%) comprised primarily of poor unemployed individuals with a mostly medium-level of education (vocational or secondary) who do not feel comfortable with their lives, have not found their place and are mainly dissatisfied although still optimistic. The third and largest group are the “confused” individuals (40%) with an average socio-economic status, typically middle-aged and confused about their place in life as well as their plans for the future.

The state of IDPs should be mentioned separately. They appear to be in a generally much worse condition. Their economic status is lower as they earn significantly less than the locals making for a particularly bleak situation given the overall low levels of earning in the surveyed area. Their main source of income is the IDP allowance. Overall, they have a more negative perception of life. They remain unhappy about living in the neighbourhood after twenty years. They have problems with relationships between family members and are more dissatisfied about their health and employment status as compared to locals. INTRODUCTION

The research presented in this paper was implemented by the Georgian Foundation for Strategic and International Studies within the framework of the Across the Georgian-Abkhaz Conflict Divide: Addressing the Needs of Locals (Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti) project funded by the British Embassy in Georgia. The research aimed at evaluating the general well-being of the population along the Administrative Border Line (ABL) with Abkhazia and the efficiency of the assistance programmes towards alleviating the consequences of the conflict. To this end, respondents were surveyed about their socio-economic status, the main problems they face and the region where they live and questioned about the local infrastructure, their satisfaction with life and their plans for the future as well as their attitudes towards the work and roles of international and local NGOs in the region and including their perspectives on the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict. The fieldwork was carried out between August-September 2012. Data analysis and report writing were finalised in September 2012.

Methodology The survey was administered in 11 locations (see Table 1) along the Georgian-Abkhaz Administrative Border Line (ABL). The locations were selected randomly although initial choices had to be changed in some cases due to problems with accessibility to the area. As there was no comprehensive sampling frame available, a proportional quota sampling was applied to identify the respondents. The quotas were established for each location based upon the distribution of IDPs and locals as well as males and females in a particular city or village. In several locations, interviewers were not able to observe the defined proportions of IDPs and locals. In order to correct for misrepresentation of certain groups in the sample, cases have been weighted to ensure that proportions of IDPs/locals in the sample represent the true proportions in the population.

In total, 500 individuals were interviewed with Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) comprising 35% and female respondents making up 55%. 2 Table 1: Sample Characteristics

Survey Unit IDP Local Total Female Male Total 1 Zugdidi 64 130 194 113 81 194 2 Tsalenjikha 12 58 70 35 35 70 3 Chuberi 7 15 22 14 8 22 4 Anaklia 10 16 26 17 9 26 5 Khurcha 9 11 20 10 10 20 Potskho- 6 10 10 20 10 10 20 Etseri 7 Rukhi 35 30 65 32 33 65 8 Ganmukhuri 10 14 24 12 12 24 9 Tskoushi 6 12 18 9 9 18 10 Kalagani 9 10 19 8 11 19 11 Khaishi 3 19 22 13 9 22 Total 175 (35%) 325 (65%) 500 (100%) 273 (55%) 227 (45%) 500 (100%)

Social Profile of the Respondents Individuals with secondary and tertiary educational levels are represented almost equally in the sample at 39% and 36%, respectively. The interviewed individuals are mostly of working age and married (65%). Only a very small share (4%) is represented by students. Those stating that they are unemployed comprised 30%. It is surprising that only 3% mentioned activity in the agricultural sector given the large share of respondents residing in rural areas. Almost a fifth of the sample appears to be housewives and 15% work in state institutions. The absolute majority (98%) of the respondents are Georgian Orthodox Christians and speak Georgian as a mother tongue. In light of this near homogeneity of respondents, the findings in the remainder of the report have not been aggregated by the variables of ethnicity, religion and native language. FINDINGS

1. Problems Most Acute Problems in the Settlement/Region The top problems for their city or village as ranked by the respondents are: lack of social protection/ poverty – 30%, economic crisis – 18% and the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict, the harsh conditions facing IDPs and the poor access to quality medical care (at 12%, 11% and 10% respectively). It is clear that economic hardship together with concerns regarding political stability and the state of IDPs represent the major problem in every location. The population across the border line seems to be less concerned about other topics such as corruption, the state of democracy in the country, underdeveloped infrastructure or access to education. It is worth noting that there are marked differences in problem perception amongst IDPs and locals. Unsurprisingly, IDPs are significantly more concerned about the state of the displaced population as compared to the locals; on the other hand, locals attach a stronger significance to most of the other major problems as compared to IDPs (see Chart 1). The perception of problems does not differ significantly amongst the various age groups. The only trend standing out is that the younger population (aged 18 to 27 years) does not attach the same level of acuteness to political issues such as the conflict between Georgia and Abkhazia and the poor level of the relationship between Georgia and Russia. Additionally, not many of them consider the local economic crisis to be as problematic as does the older generation. It is also worth mentioning that 62% of those who highlighted the problem of the inadequate access to quality education are people with a secondary/vocational education level. Chart 1: Most Acute Problems in Settlement/Region

Natural disasters 7% 6% 22% Georgia-Russian conflict 18% 3 10% Underdevoloped infrastructure 10% 7% Lack of quality education 8% 25% Lack of quality medical care 21% Local 17% Harsh conditions of IDPs 58% IDP 54% Economic crisis 31% 29% Georgian-Abkhaz conflict 42% Decreasing number of population 9% 8% 80% Lack of social protection 82% 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Most Acute Problems at the Personal Level Identification of problems at the personal level gives a somewhat different picture. The leading problems have been cited as unemployment (40%), a lack of access to quality medical care (29%) and the difficulty to cross the Administrative Border Line (11%) with the issue of border crossing being of concern only to the IDP population. The issue of inadequate education and an underdeveloped infrastructure was cited next in the list of importance with each being mentioned by 8% of the respondents. Comparing the answers of IDPs and locals, it becomes evident that the displaced population is again much more concerned about specific IDP-related problems (such as crossing the Administrative Border Line) than other topics. In almost all other cases, there is no significant difference amongst IDPs and locals when assessing the acuteness of problems (see Chart 2). There are also no major differences in problem perception between the various age groups and people with different levels of education. Chart 2: Most Acute Problems at the Personal Level

Unemployment 86% 82% Difficulty crossing the border line 41% Difficulty of interactin 5% with relatives 16%16% 19% Underdevoloped infrastructure 15% Local IDP Lack of access quality 21% education 18% 4.7% Increased level of crime 2% Lack of access to quality 67% medical care 65% 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

The population across the Administrative Border Line does not expect the situation to worsen significantly when it comes to crime rates, discrimination upon an ethnic basis, infrastructure development or the protection of citizens vis-à-vis law enforcement bodies. In the coming three years, however, 39% are worried that it will become increasingly difficult to cross the ABL, 31% think that it will be hard to find jobs/earning opportunities and about 20% anticipate worsened conditions when it comes to access to quality education and health care. The dominance of economic problems is also evident from the issues of particular importance for the respondents in terms of improving the socio-economic conditions in their particular location. These include in the order of importance: creation/improvement of employment services (39%), supporting 4 small- and medium-size business development (23%) and increased financing for social protection (22%). 2. Socio-Economic Profile of the Population Subjective and objective poverty indices were created as a means of analysing the socio-economic profiles of the respondents. The Subjective Poverty Index (SPI) was computed using the questions How would you assess your family’s economic condition? and How sufficient is your income? These questions were re-coded to match each other’s response categories and then added to each other using the “compute” option. If a person answered “1” for the first question, therefore, meaning “poor” and chose the first answer (“1”) for the second question, meaning that “income is insufficient for even food and clothing,” he would receive a minimum score of 2 on the Subjective Poverty Index. The maximum score for the SPI is 6. (Both variables have only three categories of answers). The Objective Poverty Index (OPI) was computed in a similar fashion. Three questions were used: Which of the following items does your family own?, What was your average family expenditure in the last month? and What was your average family income in the last month? The answer categories were labelled: 1 - low, 2 - lower middle, 3 - upper middle and 4 - well-off. For the last two questions, these categories referred to expenditure and income levels, respectively, whereas these categories were defined based upon the number of items possessed by the family as concerns the first question. For example, a person owning only three items from the list1 would receive a score of “1,” a person owning six items would receive a score of “2” and so forth. The minimum score for the OPI could be 3 and the maximum 9. The majority of the respondents identify themselves as belonging to the lower middle class of poverty (75%). This is the group that has indicated their families’ economic status as “average” and stated that income is only enough for food and clothing. The OPI also indicates the same group to be the largest at 63%. From the objective definition, this is a group of people whose average monthly earning and expenditure falls in the range of GEL 100-500 and who owns at least half of the items from the list of possessions. In all other cases, the subjective and objective assessment of economic status is roughly the same with the exception of the upper middle class (OPI ranks 22% of respondents in this group as opposed to 14% according to SPI).

1 The list includes: 1. house in the village apart from the main dwelling place, 2. house/apartment in the city apart from the main dwelling place, 3. land plot, 4. car, 5. colour television, 6. video player, 7. refrigerator, 8. air conditioner, 9. electric/ gas stove, 10. water boiler, 11.computer, 12.mobile telephone. The same is true in the case of the “well-off” group although to a lesser extent. (This clearly points towards the fact that respondents tend to underrate their economic status.) Chart 3: Comparing Subjective v. Objective Poverty Assessment

80 70 60 50

40 Subjective 30 Objective 20 10 0 Poor Lower Upper Weel-off middle middle

There have been significant differences revealed between IDPs and locals in terms of economic status. Namely, there are 17% more IDPs who have income less than GEL 300 as compared to locals; 11% more locals have income in the range of GEL 300 to 700 as compared to IDPs and 7% more locals earn more than GEL 700 per month as compared to IDPs. Findings reveal that geographical location also has an effect upon economic status with a significant association between the two.2 Zugdidi is clearly the lead location when it comes to the proportion of people in the “upper middle” and “well-off” groups. Of the respondents in Zugdidi, 36% declare themselves to be either in the “upper middle” or “well-off” groups. The ratio of “rich” (“upper middle” 5 and “well-off”) to “poor” (“poor” and “lower middle”) is 1:1.7 in Zugdidi. The situation worsens slightly in Tsalenjikha and Chuberi/Khaishi where there are two “poor” people per one “rich” person (1:2). In Anaklia, Khurcha and Ganmukhuri, the ratio is 1:3. The poorest regions according to this analysis are Rukhi (seven “poor” per one “rich” individual) and Potskho-Etseri, Kalagani and Tskoushi. In these last three locations, a total of only 1% indicates belonging to the “rich” group which gives a ratio of 1:54. Overall and as also shown in the previous charts, the share of people in the “lower middle” class is the largest in every location. This analysis also points towards the divide between urban and rural areas. In Zugdidi, for instance, the better economic status of the population is achieved at the cost of a higher share of people with regular income, those who own their business and involved in trade or do manual work for income. Chart 4: Objective Poverty Assessment across the Locations

120

100

60 Poor Lower middle 40 Upper middle well-off 20

0 Zugdidi Tsalenjikha Anaklia Chuberi Rukhi Potskho-Etseri Khurcha Khaishi Tskoushi Ganmukhuri Kalagani

2 (Chi square (15) =59.84, p<.001) When it comes to income, three major sources are pensions for about 20% of the respondents, monthly salaries for roughly 19% of the respondents and IDP allowances for almost 17% of the respondents. Other important sources of income constitute earnings from the production of agricultural produce (10%) and wages from irregular/temporary jobs (10%). Other sources of income are negligible. Given the large territory of the rural area, it is surprising that earnings from agricultural produce have such a small share in the average income of the families. This could, however, be explained by the mostly subsistence farming practice amongst the local population and the low productivity of this sector. Note also that only 32% of the respondents mention owning a land plot. Only in Anaklia, Khurcha and Ganmukhuri does agriculture represent a major income source for locals (on average 40% in each location). There are three major areas with significant differences when comparing the income sources between IDPs and locals. Obviously, the IDP allowance is only for IDPs and, at the same time, represents the only major source of income for this group. Apart from this, it should be mentioned that 24% of locals indicate revenue from agricultural produce as their main source of income whilst only 9% amongst IDPs state the same. It also appears that assistance from friends/relatives is more common amongst locals (11%) than IDPs (4%). In Zugdidi, as the leader in terms of the level of the socio-economic condition of the people, the main sources of income are regular salaries and pensions. In Rukhi, as the poorest location, the population relies mostly upon social assistance such as pensions (29%) and IDP allowances (43%). We conclude the description of the socio-economic profile of the respondents by estimating the employment status of the individual using five predictor variables; namely: gender, age, IDP status, region and level of education. The results of the binary logistic regression suggest that location is the only significant factor affecting the employment status of the individual. (None of the other predictor variables turned out to have a significant effect upon the probability of employment.) More specifically, the model estimates that there is a rural-urban divide when it comes to employment opportunities. People in Zugdidi and Tsalenjikha are almost two times more likely to be employed than people in the rest of the locations.

6 3. Life Satisfaction and Plans for the Future Overall, the population across the Administrative Border Line is not satisfied with life. Family relations is the only area in which there is almost a full majority of satisfied people. A particularly large proportion of respondents is not happy about their income (86%), jobs (65%) and living conditions (67%) which are all interlinked and, once again, point towards the harsh economic conditions of the respondents. When it comes to specific locations, a particularly large group of respondents is unhappy about their life in Potskho-Etseri at 80% (almost all of them are IDPs), Ganmukhuri at 78% and Kalagani at 83%, the last two of which are almost next to the border making for a combination of extremely poor living conditions and a tense political situation. On the other hand, around 70% of the population in Zugdidi, Khurcha and Khaishi are happy about living in their respective city or village. Chart 5: Life Satisfaction

60% Life in general 40%

60% Situation in country 40% 44% Life in the area 56% Not satisfied Satisfied 67% Living conditions 33% 7% Family 93%

51% Health 49% 86% Income 14%

28% Education 72%

65% Job 35% 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 It becomes evident upon closer look that IDPs have a much more negative perception of life as compared to locals. Chart 6 shows the differences amongst the IDP and non-IDP populations only for those topics in which the difference proved to be statistically significant. Results indicate that IDPs are still unhappy about living in the neighbourhood after 20 years. They have problems with the relationships between family members and are more dissatisfied about their health and employment status as compared to locals. Chart 6: Differences in Life Satisfaction between IDPs and Locals

74% Life in general 26%

72% Situation in country 28%

74% Life in the area 26% Local 66% IDP Family realtions 34%

Health 71% 29%

Job 74% 26%

0 20 40 60 80

More than a fifth of respondents (23%) reports having a permanent feeling of discomfort whilst another 45% feels “somewhat comfortable.” There is quite a strong negative relationship detected between a person’s income and his level of comfort.3 In other words, the level of discomfort decreases as income increases. As previously mentioned, there is a correlation between IDP status and income sources and so it is not surprising that the feelings of IDPs and locals also differ significantly in terms of their comfort levels (following the assumption that income is one of the main determinants of how a person feels). See Chart 6. Chart 7: Feeling of Comfort amongst IDPs and Locals 7

50 45 40 35 30 IDP 25 Local 20 15 10 5 0 Comfortabe Somewhat Not comfortable comfortable There is also a relationship between the type of a person’s residence and his feeling of comfort. People who own their own houses tend to display higher levels of comfort.

Perception of Future In spite of the rather gloomy picture of how people perceive their life, it is quite surprising how optimistically they view their future. Of the respondents, 93% think that everything will be fine in the coming years, 65% think that the economic status of their families will improve over the coming three years, 40% do not plan on any major changes in their life and only around 27% are thinking about changing professions. Those who plan on acquiring new professional skills are predominantly individuals who are currently unemployed, including housewives (51%). Only 11% holding public servant positions

3 (Gamma = -.588. p<.001) are willing to change occupation. A rather small share of respondents is planning to change their living place inside the country (8%) and even less are planning to move abroad permanently (2%). It is hard to trace the reason for such optimism as it is not related to the fact of being local or having a higher income and better living conditions. Education level is also without effect or influence here. There are no major differences between IDPs and locals or between people with different educational levels in this regard. There has also been no relationship detected between the income status and plans for the future.

Cluster Analysis Four main variables have been used in defining the cluster composition: satisfaction with life, comfort level, finding one’s place in life and age (age, however, did not turn out to be an important determinant). Cluster analysis reveals that there are three major clusters which based upon the forthcoming discussion can be referred to as: a cluster of “happy people” (28%), a cluster of “depressed but optimistic people” (31%) and a cluster of “confused people” (40%). Table 2: Cluster Distribution

Number of Cases % of Combined % of Total Happy 137 28.5% 27.4% Depressed but Optimistic 148 30.8% 29.6% Cluster Confused 195 40.6% 39.0% Combined 480 100.0% 96.0% Excluded Cases 20 4.0% Total 500 100.0%

8 In the first cluster, everyone feels comfortable about life. Around 60% of them state that they have found their place in life and generally feel happy about their situation. Looking at the demographic composition of these people, it appears that gender and family status are not significantly associated with clusters (for example, half of the respondents belonging to the first cluster are male and the other half are female; roughly 40% are married). Age, however, is an important determinant. It only differs significantly between the first and third clusters. The first cluster, for example, is comprised mostly of younger people aged 25-37 years. Factors significantly associated with clusters are: income and the Objective Poverty Index (65% of the individuals in the first cluster have an average income above GEL 400 per month, 54% fall in the category of “well-off” or “upper middle level”). Of these “well-off” or “upper middle level” people, 98% of them look at the future with hope, 40% do not have plans to change something in their lives and 23% want a different profession. Most of the people in this cluster are locals (86% as compared to 14% of IDPs.) More than half of them have a higher education. Employed and unemployed are almost equally represented in this cluster. We can summarise, therefore, that the first cluster is a group of predominantly wealthy, highly educated locals (non-IDPs) aged 25-37 who feel very comfortable about life and look with high hopes to the future with no major plans to change things in their lives. The second cluster, which is the second largest and completely opposite from the first cluster, most probably should be named “depressed.” None of the individuals within feels comfortable; they are self- assessed as either “uncomfortable” (45%) or “somewhat comfortable” (54%). None of the respondents indicated that they have found their place in life with more than 60% stating that they are not satisfied with life in general. There tends to be a slightly higher share of women in the second and third clusters although, as previously mentioned, this is not statistically significant. Additionally, age does not play a role in this group as there is a mix of various aged people represented. Almost 80% have a monthly average income of less than GEL 300, putting them into the category of “poor” according to the Objective Poverty Index. Of those in the second cluster, 87% are hopeful about the future (this trend does not change across clusters). Here, there is a slightly higher proportion of people who want to change their occupation as compared to the first cluster (40%). The share of IDPs and locals is equal in this group. Within the cluster, 61% are people with a medium level of education (meaning secondary or vocational education) whilst most of them are unemployed (85%). We can conclude, therefore, that this is a group of predominantly poor unemployed individuals with a mostly medium level of education (vocational or secondary) who do not feel comfortable in life, have not found their place and are mainly dissatisfied with life although remain optimistic about the future. The majority of individuals in the third cluster feels “somewhat comfortable” (75%). They are confused and do not know whether or not they have found their place in life. In terms of life satisfaction, it does not seem to the defining feature since both groups are equally represented. Respondents in the third cluster are mostly with a low income, (50% below GEL 300 and 20% below GEL 100) although in a better economic situation than those of the second cluster (lower middle class on the OPI). The share of unemployed is also lower as compared to the second cluster (65%). As in the other clusters, 95% of respondents also look to the future with high hopes. Almost a fifth are confused about their future life plans and have no answer when it comes to plans for the future. Of these, 60% are locals with a medium-to-high level of education and an average age above 42 years. We can conclude that the third cluster is comprised mostly of individuals with an average socio-economic status. They are middle aged and confused about their place in life as well as their plans for the future.

4. Changes in Public Perception of Main Policy Areas

The majority of respondents (87%) indicated that they feel much more secure in these last three-to- four years than they did before and the assessment of the changes within a wide spectrum of public life during this period is rather positive overall. Respondents single out several spheres where they think the situation has improved during the last three years. This includes: political stability (67%), infrastructure (77%), work of law enforcement bodies (77%), system of social protection (62%) and the fight against crime (89%). (Interestingly, these comprise the areas of major reforms implemented by the current government.) The majority of those who think that infrastructure has improved live in urban areas (Zugdidi). There is no single area where the proportion of “worsened” is larger than other categories. 9 The only area in which respondents think the situation has worsened to the greatest extent is in the area of Georgian-Abkhaz relations although the majority still thinks that nothing has changed in this regard.

Chart 8: Public Perception of Changes in Main Policy Spheres

100 Improved Worsened 90 Did not change Do not know 80

Infrastructure in governance Political stability Freedom of press Fight against crime Economic conditionAccess to education Local self-governance Democratic principles

Law enforcement bodies Social protection system Georgia-Abkhaz relations Environmental protection The level of belief in the improvement of law enforcement (78%) and local self-governance (46%) is directly translated into the levels of trust towards these institutions. People show a high level of trust towards the police (77%) and local self-governance (60%). Apart from this, the Church remains as the unanimous leader when it comes to public trust (including clerical organisations) at 86%. Very interesting to note is that trust levels did not show any statistically significant difference amongst IDPs and locals in any of the surveyed areas.

Chart 9: Trust towards Public Institutions and Organisations

International Organisation 50% 18% 32%

Church 86% 10%4%

NGOs 54% 16% 30% Trust Count 45% 25% 30% Do not trust Do not know Police 77% 13% 10%

Parliament 40% 31% 29%

Central governance 59% 19% 22%

Self-governance 60% 22% 18% 0 20 40 60 80 100

5. Georgian-Abkhaz Relations

10 Of the respondents, 98% think that IDPs should be allowed to return to their homes without any pre- condition. During the last year, 68% of IDPs reported not to have crossed the ABL at all and only about 3% say that they regularly (once a month) go to the other side of the border. The absolute majority travel there to visit relatives. Opinions about the issues contributing to the improvement of Georgian-Abkhaz relations differ to a great extent and there is no one leading answer. Of the respondents, 30% think that the key is the readiness of both sides for compromise whilst 16% believe that this will be a loss of interest in Abkhazia within Russian politics. The situation is the same when asked about possible ways to improve Georgian-Abkhaz relations with 18% of respondents citing the need to speed up economic development processes in the country and an additional 18% thinking that it is important to sign bilateral agreements about the non- use of force and economic co-operation/trade between the people on the two sides of the ABL. There are not any significant differences in opinions between IDPs and locals in this regard. When asked to rank the Abkhaz people on a range of different characteristics (honesty, courage, friendship, reliability, cultural closeness and work ethic), respondents were very careful in their replies with most of them ranking them in the middle category meaning that they believe Abkhaz to be “neither honest, nor dishonest.” Overall, the disposition towards the Abkhaz people is rather positive with 70% of the respondents indicating that they have no problem if an Abkhaz marries one of their relatives, makes friends with them, lives next door as neighbours, works together with someone who is Abkhaz or if he becomes a citizen of Georgia. 6. Situation Assessment per Location

ZUGDIDI (number of cases – 194)

Economic status: In Zugdidi, 36% of the respondents declare themselves to be either in the “upper middle” or “well-off” groups which comprise the largest share of individuals in these particular groups as compared to other locations. The main sources of income are regular salaries, pensions and revenue from business. Social services: In Zugdidi, 64% of respondents assess their access to medical services as “average” with 21% indicating the situation concerning these services as “bad.” The average distance to a medical institution is 2 km. Approximately 40% state that there has been a case during the current year when a family member has needed medical assistance but they did not receive attention for financial reasons. About 15% of the respondents here have a family member with special needs with the majority indicating that there are no social services available tailored to the needs of these individuals. Physical infrastructure: The population of Zugdidi seems not to have any problems related tothe provision of potable and irrigation water although the latter is relevant only for 35% of the respondents. Wood is mostly used for heating (73%) with a small share using electric heaters (27%). The absolute majority has access to the main communication means such as landline telephones, internet and mobile telephones alongside the services of a post office in Zugdidi. The absolute majority assesses the provision of electricity and public transport as “good” although a bit less than half (43%) is concerned about the state of roads which they believe to be in poor condition. Public awareness and civil participation: The primary source of information is television (96%) with a considerable part of the respondents also using the internet to retrieve news (45%). Of those surveyed, 20% say that they take part in decision-making processes in their city, 31% engage sometimes and 44% have never taken part in this process. Further, 90% declare that they feel much safer now than they did three years ago. None of the international organisations has been noted as having made a profound contribution to the lives of the respondents in Zugdidi. 11 Tolerance, trust, feeling of comfort and life satisfaction:

How comfortable do you feel? Comfortable – 38%, Somewhat comfortable – 47%, Permanently in discomfort – 15% Have you found your place in life? Yes – 57%, No – 28%, Do not know – 15% Can you express yourself freely? Yes, I can express myself freely – 72%, Yes, I can express myself somewhat freely – 21%, No, I cannot express myself freely – 7% Do people around you deserve trust? Yes – 58%, No – 30%, Do not know – 12% Satisfied with life in general? Yes – 48%, No – 45%, Do not know – 7% The attitude towards the Orthodox Church is very positive as expected. As for representatives of other religions, most of the respondents (60%) have neither a positive nor a negative attitude. Only when it comes to representatives of non-traditional religious groups, however, a significant share of the respondents at 40% openly state that they have a negative attitude towards them. Half of the respondents in Zugdidi think that no other Church should have the same rights as the Orthodox Church, 17% have no opinion about this topic and 32% think that other Churches should have the same rights as the Orthodox Church. Peace/order in the country and economic well-being were two main points singled out by the respondents as being the most important in their lives (approximately 70% of respondents mentioned both of the points). TSALENJIKHA (number of cases – 70)

Economic status: There are two “poor” people for each “rich” person in Tsalenjikha. More than half of the respondents identify themselves with the group of “lower middle” income class whilst 15% state they are “poor.” The main source of income for locals apart from regular salaries (mentioned by 52%) and pensions (mentioned by 38%) is revenue from agricultural produce. Social services: The majority of respondents in Tsalenjikha think that access to medical care is either “bad” (34%) or “average” (44%). Half of the respondents stated there has been a case when their family member needed medical assistance but it was not obtained due to financial reasons. The average distance to the medical facility is 3.5 km. The majority has no person with disabilities in the household (88%); those who do have a disabled family member declare that no social services are available for them. Physical infrastructure: Access to potable and irrigation water is assessed in the area as mainly “good” or “average.” Wood is the main means for heating (for 87%). The absolute majority has access to mobile telephones (96%) whilst only half of the respondents has access to internet and landline telephones. As in Zugdidi, the majority in Tsalenjikha is satisfied with the provision of electricity (83%) and access to public transportation (75%) with 29% believing that roads are in poor condition and 33% stating them to be “average.” Public awareness and civil participation: Television is the most common source of information for respondents in Tsalenjikha (97%). At the same time, other sources have also been mentioned; notably, newspapers by 48% and internet by 36% of the respondents. Further, 85% state that they feel safer now than they did three years ago. No international organisation has been mentioned as having had a profound effect upon the locals. Up to 97% say that these organisations made no change to their life; only 7% mentioned USAID. Almost half of the respondents say that they take no part in decision-making, 30% do it sometimes and another 17% say they are regularly involved. Tolerance, trust, feeling of comfort and life satisfaction: How comfortable do you feel? 12 Comfortable – 33%, Somewhat comfortable – 54%, Permanently in discomfort – 13% Have you found your place in life? Yes – 52%, No – 34%, Do not know – 14% Can you express yourself freely? Yes, I can express myself freely – 54%, Yes, I can express myself somewhat freely – 27%, No, I cannot express myself freely – 14%, Do not know – 5% Do people around you deserve trust? Yes – 62%, No – 25%, Do not know – 13% Satisfied with life in general? Yes – 44%, No – 40%, Do not know – 16% The attitude towards the Orthodox Church is very positive amongst the absolute majority. As for the representatives of other religions or non-traditional religious groups, most of the respondents (75%) say their disposition is neither bad nor good with 60% of the respondents in Tsalenjikha thinking that no other Church should have same rights as the Orthodox Church and 30% indicating the opposite. The remainder of the respondents preferred not to answer the question. In terms of those issues thought to be very important in their lives, respondents indicated order in the country (73%), the ability to influence decisions (3%), economic well-being (75%) and democratic values/freedom (27%).

RUKHI (number of cases – 65)

Economic status: The analysis shows that Rukhi is the poorest location as compared to others participating in the survey. There are seven “poor” per each “rich” individual in this location. Major sources of income have been named as state social assistance including the IDP allowance, pensions and Targeted Social Assistance. Almost a quarter also mentioned that they received income from a random job. Social services: Slightly over a half (54%) of the households in Rukhi have had a situation during the current year when they could not secure health services for their family members due to financial reasons. Of the respondents, 90% find medical care to be either “average” or “bad.” The average distance to the medical institution is 2 km. Whilst the majority has no family member with disabilities (87%), no one in Rukhi has indicated that social services are available for these individuals. Physical infrastructure: Whilst there are no concerns regarding drinking water in the area, irrigation water seems to be problematic with 46% stating that access to the water for irrigation is “bad,” another 30% indicating that they are not using it and only the rest stating that they are fine with it. Wood is used for heating by 85% of respondents. There are no landline telephones or post office in the village. The main means of communication are mobile telephones (all respondents mentioned using them) with only 17% having access to the internet. A very small share (10%) mentioned problems with electricity and access to public transportation. Considerably more (40%) are concerned about the condition of roads. Public awareness and civil participation: The main source of information, as everywhere else in the surveyed locations, is television (stated by 95%), followed by relatives/friends (stated by 30%). The percentage of internet users in this location is the second lowest as compared to other locations (9%). Of the respondents, 94% stated that they feel safer now than they did three years ago. Again, no single organisation was cited for its contribution to the life of the local community. Further, 64% stated that they never participate in decision-making processes with 22% indicating that they do sometimes. Tolerance, trust, feeling of comfort and life satisfaction:

How comfortable do you feel? Comfortable – 13%, Somewhat comfortable – 51%, Permanently in discomfort – 36% Have you found your place in life? Yes – 54%, No – 34%, Do not know – 12% Can you express yourself freely? Yes, I can express myself freely – 70%, Yes, I can express myself somewhat freely – 23%, No, I cannot express myself freely – 7% 13 Do people around you deserve trust? Yes – 77%, No – 22%, Do not know – 1% Satisfied with life in general? Yes – 54%, No – 34%, Do not know – 10% Attitudes towards different religious groups are exactly the same as in other cases: there is an absolutely positive attitude towards the Orthodox Church and, on average, 75% are neutral in their opinions of other religions with the exception of the non-traditional ones with 30% expressing a negative attitude. In line with this finding, 75% think that no other Church should have the same rights as the Orthodox Church. Two of the main points that respondents singled out as the most important for their life are economic well-being (93%) and peace/order in the country (68%).

ANAKLIA, KHURCHA, GANMUKHURI (number of cases – 70)

Economic status: Almost half of the respondents in these three villages, located south-west of Zugdidi, identify themselves with the “lower middle” income group. The ratio of “poor” to “rich” is 1:3. Similar to other rural locations in the region, the main sources of income have been mentioned associal allowances and the revenue from agricultural produce. Social services: Almost half of the respondents had a case during the year when they were not able to seek medical assistance due to financial reasons. Only 5% assess the access to medical care as “good” whilst the rest believes it to be either “average” or “bad.” The distance to the closest medical facility differs from 50 metres in Anaklia to 35 km in Khurcha. A quarter of the respondents have a disabled family member with all of them stating that social services for such individuals are not available in the area. Physical infrastructure: Drinking water is not an issue in Anaklia and Khurcha although only 12 out of 24 respondents in Ganmukhuri assess it as “average.” Access to irrigation water is mostly judged as problematic in all three villages. Wood is the main source of heating (93%). Almost everyone has mobile telephones; only 22% have access to the internet and 60% to landline telephones. The provision of public transportation and electricity is assessed as mostly good (75%) although the condition of roads is assessed as mostly bad (38%) or average (40%). Public awareness and civil participation:As usual amongst the respondents, television is the lead source of information. Around 20% say that they rely upon newspapers and another 20% state that their friends/ relatives are information sources. Within this group, 87% stated that they feel much safer now than they did three years ago. Few international organisations have been mentioned as having contributed to the lives of locals with 10% indicating that UNHCR had a modest positive effect upon their life with DRC, USAID, the EU and UNDP also having been mentioned by about 7% of the respondents (approximately five persons). As concerns participation in local decision-making, 41% answered affirmatively, 34% replied negatively and 34% indicated a ‘sometimes’ participation. Tolerance, trust, feeling of comfort and life satisfaction:

How comfortable do you feel? Comfortable – 26%, Somewhat comfortable – 55%, Permanently in discomfort – 19% Have you found your place in life? Yes – 36%, No – 59%, Do not know – 5% Can you express yourself freely? Yes, I can express myself freely – 58%, Yes, I can express myself somewhat freely – 35%, No, I cannot express myself freely – 6% Do people around you deserve trust? Yes – 83%, No – 13%, Do not know – 3% Satisfied with life in general? 14 Yes – 37%, No – 48%, Do not know – 14% The attitude towards the Orthodox Church is absolutely positive with respondents mostly neutral as concerns other religions (75% saying their position is neither bad nor good) but negative (60%) in their attitude towards non-traditional religions. Public opinion is divided in two when it comes to the rights of other Churches with half in agreement and another half in disagreement. Economic well-being was cited by 97% of respondents as being the most important issue in their lives. About 50% of respondents from these three villages also mentioned order in society as very important for them in their lives.

CHUBERI, KHAISHI (number of cases – 44)

Economic status: There are two “poor” people for each “rich” person (1:2) in Chuberi/Khaishi. More than half of the respondents in each location associate themselves with the “lower middle” income group. Amongst the most common income sources are: regular salary (mentioned by 41%), pensions (mentioned by 40%) and revenue from agricultural produce (30%). Social services: Almost half of the respondents had a case during the last year when they were not able to seek medical assistance due to financial reasons. The average distance to the medical facility is 2.5 km. Only 5% say that access to medical services is “good” with the rest thinking that it is either “average” (60%) or “bad” (35%). A quarter of the respondents have persons with disabilities in the household with the majority of individuals (83%), including those who have disabled family members, stating that social services are not available for these people. Physical infrastructure: Potable water is of no concern for locals; however, there seems to be a problem with irrigation water with only 3% stating that they have access. An absolute 100% majority is using wood for heating. Post service and landline telephones are not available in this location. Of the respondents, 30% have access to internet and the absolute majority uses mobile telephones. There are no problems with electricity provision or access to public transportation although the condition of roads, as in other locations, remains an issue with 30% thinking local road condition is “average” and 57% thinking it is “bad.” Public awareness and civil participation: Television is the most common source of information (96% indicated that they watch television) with around 15% also stating the role of newspapers and getting news from friends/relatives. Of the respondents, 74% indicate that they feel more secure now than they did three years ago. When questioned about the role of international organisations, two respondents mentioned DRC and one cited NRC as having contributed modestly to their life. As such, the effect of INGOs is negligible in this location as it is in the other areas of the survey. More than half of the respondents (56%) state that they never take part in local decision-making processes. Tolerance, trust, feeling of comfort and life satisfaction: How comfortable do you feel? Comfortable – 40%, Somewhat comfortable – 41%, Permanently in discomfort – 19% Have you found your place in life? Yes – 27%, No – 38%, Do not know – 35% Can you express yourself freely? Yes, I can express myself freely – 46%, Yes, I can express myself somewhat freely – 43%, No, I cannot express myself freely – 11% Do people around you deserve trust? Yes – 53%, No – 30%, Do not know – 17% Satisfied with life in general? Yes – 20%, No – 72%, Do not know – 8% Almost everyone has a good attitude towards the Orthodox Church; as for other religious groups, 80% indicated an either “neutral” or “bad” opinion. Half of the respondents have a clearly negative attitude towards representatives of non-traditional religious groups. Of those surveyed, nine people are of the opinion that other Churches should not have same rights as the Orthodox Church whilst the rest of the respondents disagree. Economic well-being (87%) and order/peace in the country (60%) were mentioned by the respondents 15 as being the most important issues in their lives with only 15% stating democratic values and freedom as an issue of importance.

POTSKHO-ETSERI, TSKOUSHI, KALAGANI (number of cases – 57)

Economic status: Together with Rukhi, these villages are amongst the poorest locations in the survey with approximately 60% of respondents in each case falling into the category of “poor” or “lower middle.” The main sources of income have been noted as social allowances (pensions, IDP allowances), revenue from agricultural produce and odd job opportunities. Social services: Of the respondents, 71% had a case during the current year when a family member could not receive medical care when they needed it due to financial reasons. The average distance to the medical facility is 3.5 km. Access to health care is generally characterised as “bad” (54%) or “average” (42%) with only two respondents stating that it was “good.” Almost a quarter of the respondents (23%) have a person with disabilities in the family with the absolute majority stating that there are no social services for such individuals. Physical infrastructure: There are no problems with drinking water for the most part with only a few cases in Kalagani (four persons) mentioning difficult access to potable water. In Potskho-Etseri, the question of irrigation water was largely irrelevant but 11 out of 16 respondents in Tskoushi and 10 out of 19 in Kalagani stated that access to irrigation water is “bad.” Wood is used for heating by 97% of the respondents in these three locations. There is no post office in these villages. Only four individuals mentioned using the internet whilst 26% have landline telephones and almost everyone uses a mobile telephone. The provision of electricity is assessed as “good” by 75%. Every single respondent from Tskoushi and Kalagani reported that road conditions are bad with the same situation in Potskho-Etseri with the exception of seven individuals who thought the condition could be ranked as “medium.” Access to public transportation has been judged as mostly “good” in Tskoushi whilst “very bad” in the other two locations by almost everyone participating in the survey. Public awareness and civil participation: Of the respondents, 98% named television as a main source of information with friends/relatives (mentioned by 25%) as a common second source. Further, 83% indicated that they feel more secure now than they did three years ago. A maximum two-or-three individuals mentioned international NGOs as having profoundly affected their lives. Participation in decision-making is very limited (16% said that they take part in this process whilst the remaining majority does not). Tolerance, trust, feeling of comfort and life satisfaction: How comfortable do you feel? Comfortable – 10%, Somewhat comfortable – 33%, Permanently in discomfort – 57% Have you found your place in life? Yes – 44%, No – 44%, Do not know – 12% Can you express yourself freely? Yes, I can express myself freely – 60%, Yes, I can express myself somewhat freely – 27%, No, I cannot express myself freely – 6%, Do not know/Do not want to answer – 7% Do people around you deserve trust? Yes – 75%, No – 15 %, Do not know – 10% Satisfied with life in general? Yes – 36%, No – 55%, Do not know – 9% Almost everyone has a good attitude towards the Orthodox Church alongside a mostly “neutral” attitude towards other religious groups with the difference that non-traditional religious groups are perceived more negatively as in other locations in the survey (at about 60%). Opinion is divided when it comes to the rights of other Churches. Of the respondents, 44% think that they should have the same rights as the Orthodox Church, another 44% indicated that they should not and the remainder declined to answer the question. Economic well-being (92%) and order/peace in the country (54%) were mentioned as being the most 16 important issues in their lives with only 14% stating democratic values and freedom as an issue of importance. HUMANITARIAN AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMMES IN SAMEGRELO-ZEMO SVANETI

Manana Gabashvili

INTRODUCTION

This study is a part of a wider research project with the overall aim to support development assistance related policy design towards conflict-affected areas of Georgia along the Administrative Boundary Line (ABL) with Abkhazia. The immediate goal of the study is to identify the strengths and the weaknesses of the programmes which have been implemented in the Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti region in the late post- conflict situation (2008-12). The programmes are viewed in relation to their responses to the challenges that influence the quality of life of the population in the region.

Brief Overview of the Region One of the very first thoughts that comes to mind in regard to Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti is its proximity to the ABL with Abkhazia and its status of a conflict zone. Naturally enough, this implies security/insecurity 17 issues and perceptions of safety/unsafety, especially concerning those people (numbering a few thousand) who regularly travel back and forth across the Enguri Bridge or other paths to the Gali District.1 The feelings of constantly being in transition, however, and within a kind of ‘stable instability’ characterise not only the displaced but appear to be common amongst the host population as well.2 The poor economic situation and the hardship of everyday life contribute to an increased sense of vulnerability for both of the communities. Economically, the 466,100 population-strong region3 (10,67% of the total Georgian population) has been dependent mostly upon agriculture. The production of hazelnuts, citrus and maize still remain the major sources of income for the local population in Samegrelo whilst it is potato growing and animal farming for the people in Zemo Svaneti. Job opportunities are limited.4 The recent government initiatives to convert the town of Anaklia, a site of special historical significance in Samegrelo, into a major touristic attraction has hitherto not marked any tangible changes in terms of new job creation although it has resulted in a few positions with building companies5 and in a couple of hotels. Some temporary employment has also been created at construction sites in Svaneti (the building of the road from Jvari to Mestia, in particular).6 As a result, Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti shares the main challenges of all Georgian regions; these being poverty and a lack of employment.7 Unemployment is a problem across Georgian society as a whole.8 Information from the UNDP Country Programme 2011-2015 states: “Impressive economic growth in [2004-2007] was accompanied by increasing unemployment (up by 4% in five years since 2004) and increased vulnerabilities with 23.6% of the population living below the poverty line and 9.3% in extreme poverty (2008 data).”9 The overall employment rate in Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti is officially 59% with the majority of people being self-employed in farming (77%)10 and some in the “tourist business” (Zemo Svaneti). These figures, however, represent official data whereas the “real” figures are, allegedly, lower.11 All of the research’s key respondents named the lack of employment as one of the two most acute current problems/challenges facing them and their region.12 At the same time, the region has one of the largest proportions of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) with the second highest concentration of the so-called old IDP caseload (i.e., the first wave IDPs from Abkhazia in the early 1990s) after Tbilisi with 34% of the current total number13 (the percentage increased to 40% during different periods). For the reason of this large IDP population, Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti has been the focus of various assistance programmes dating to 1993. The programmes, however, had emergency or post-emergency aid goals and were less oriented towards a development perspective including finding durable solutions for the displaced such as their socio-economic integration into local communities.

During the first 15 years of displacement, even in those rare cases when the word “integration” was mentioned within the projects targeting IDPs, it was usually qualified as a “temporary integration” (see, for example, Anna Matveeva’s, New Approach to IDP Assistance. External Evaluation, UNDP Self-Reliance project 2000-2004. Tbilisi-London, 2005, p. 5). Only with the adoption of the State Strategy on IDPs in 2007 (and later with its Action Plan in 2008 and its amended version in 2011), IDPs’ socio-economic integration and durable housing solutions were explicitly set as a priority. Until then, both state policy and public discourse had focused upon return as the only potentially durable settlement option for the displaced population.

Only after the August 2008 war with Russia, when return was fully realised (and accepted) as a distant prospect, has the Georgian Government shown a genuine will to promote local integration.14 Earlier, however, in 2007, the internal political tensions caused the Government to declare the need to address the poverty and vulnerability of the whole population-both locals and IDPs- and define poverty reduction and employment generation as the country’s two main development goals.15 No less problematic is the social sphere in which access to quality education and health care issues have remained as unmet needs facing vulnerable groups. With education, one of the major problems named is a low attendance due to the shortage of clothing and footwear that prevents children - mostly IDPs, reportedly - from going to school.16 Another challenge lies within the insufficient ability to pass the national university entrance examinations without previous private tutoring17 since the testing does not correspond to the school teaching curriculum and which affects mostly vulnerable groups such as children from poor as well as those from IDP families. 18 A study conducted by the Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC) in 2008-0918 has shown that proportionally fewer students from Abkhaz public schools19 enter higher education. It is worth noting that eight of the remaining 13 Abkhaz public schools are located in the Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti region.20 According to the NRC research: “Their lower scores in university entrance exams may be the result of a number of factors including poorly-equipped schools, a shortage of textbooks and other supplies, poor living conditions that increase the frequency of illness and prevent study at home and the inability to pay a private tutor to study for the exams. All of these factors stem from the overall limited family budgets and the long-term under- investment by authorities.21 In regard to health issues, various illnesses as well as difficult access to health care are readily mentioned.22 A higher occurrence of cancer-related diseases and thyrotoxicosis, for example, have recently been observed in the Jvari district (according to IDP data). As concerns the elderly population, the most frequently mentioned illnesses and conditions are chronic in nature and include mobility and blood pressure problems, diabetes and blood sugar problems, digestive ailments, arthritis and heart disease.23 Those problems connected with access to health care include the high costs of prescription medications as well as those of specialist-type treatment and surgeries, and inadequate health insurance coverage.24 As with education opportunities, the main problem herein also originates from the money shortage facing the families and strikes with particular consequence the vulnerable groups such as IDPs and the local poor. A family member’s illness often results in the selling or mortgaging of property to raise the money needed to cover the health care costs.25 Another challenge concerns the so-called optimisation of hospitals in which a hospital is opened or renovated (following a recent governmental initiative) whilst others in the district then stop functioning which makes it more difficult for people to seek the services of doctors because of the new and additional costs associated (e.g., travel).26 Further, this change also affects patients within acute phases of diseases that require emergency assistance. Very often, the “relocation” of medical care services is not based upon a needs assessment (including the assessment of the number of people seeking medical assistance at specific locations).27 An unanticipated change of medical insurance companies serving vulnerable groups (within the state insurance programme) may also result in difficulties to access to proper medical care for vulnerable communiy members.28 The case of Jvari out-patient clinic in 2012 when, for reasons which remain unknown, the insurance company redirected its clients to another agency which, in its turn, required appealability to another clinic located in another part of the district.

In parallel, the provision of insufficient information remains a problem for the region’s vulnerable population. IDPs and socially vulnerable groups are poorly informed about their rights as well as about existing programmes (e.g., the availability of prosthetics or hearing devices).29 Also related to health and health care, some infrastructural problems are relevant as contributing factors to the overall general situation. Water supply, the sewerage system and garbage disposal were named as long- standing needs in the region and dating to the late 1990s.30 There is some positive dynamics with running water supply (usually through pumps and a set schedule) and garbage disposal although no improvement has been achieved in regard to a sewerage system. In summary, the overwhelming majority of the problems within the spheres of education and health care are owing to the region’s financial difficulties which are closely connected to local unemployment and poverty as well as pointing out the poor management by the authorities in charge. A lack of information on support programmes is also an issue.

Current Responses (An attempt at stock-taking) Current responses are assumed to address the underlying needs of the region—unemployment and poverty—which have been recognised as the main problem issues for the whole country dating to 2007.31 Not surprisingly, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) has supported the Georgian Government in economic development which, together with democratic governance, crisis prevention and environmental protection, was one of four main areas of co-operation in 2006-10.32 At the same time, the Government, not without encouragement from the international community as well as some indirect pressure from the political opposition,33 has acknowledged the need to foster a strategic transition from recovery to long-term development with a focus upon the development of all regions of 19 Georgia including Samegrelo-Zemo Svanet.

To promote regional development, the Ministry of Regional Development and Infrastructure (MRDI) was established (2009) and the Regional Development State Strategy and its Action Plan for 2011-2015 were finalised, with support of international organisations, and approved. Development plans, which will be finalised before December 2012, aim to identify key priorities for environmentally sustainable, economic, social and human development for the regions, including Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti.

The following four sectors are the most likely targets for regional development in Georgia for the foreseeable future (2012-15):34 1. Food and Agriculture: covering agricultural production, the agro-processing industry, industry culture and agro-exports. 2. Other sectors of the economy and infrastructure: including the manufacturing industry, infrastructure, tourism and other services with special emphasis upon the support and development of small- and medium-size enterprises (SMEs). 3. Water and environment: water resources protection, irrigation, drinking water supply, sanitation, solid waste management and all issues of environmental protection. 4. Social sector: education, health care, social protection and social services. The majority of the abovementioned targets is included within the current response efforts and supported by various international agencies. According to the Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti Regional Development Office database, the following international and local organisations have been active in these areas dating to 2008: UNDP, European Union Monitoring Mission in Georgia (EUMM), Danish Refugee Council (DRC), Save the Children (SC), Centre for Civil Engagement (CCE), Human Rights Information and Documentation Centre (HRIDC), Abkhazeti Charity Humanitarian Centre (CHCA), Atinati, Gender Network of Samegrelo (GNS), Xenon and Imedi IDP Women’s Movement for Peace (see Annex 2 for a detailed overview of projects). Additionally, a number of other projects have also been contributing to long-term developmental work in the region including those implemented by USAID, UNWOMEN, Action Against Hunger (ACF), Institute for International Co-operation of the German Adult Education Association dvv-International, NRC and Education for Democracy, a local NGO. Current assistance to the region, aimed at long-term development, may be grouped into the following (but not restricted to) large and often intercrossing sectors: • Business support, livelihood – UNDP, USAID, ACF, DRC, CHCA, UNWOMEN • Education (formal and informal), including vocational education and training (VET) – UNDP, USAID, ACF, dvv-International, Atinati, CHCA, Education for Democracy • Public awareness, mass media – UNDP, Atinati, USAID, CCE, SC • Legal aid – UNDP, HRIDC, NRC • Documentation and monitoring of human rights – HRIDC, EUMM • Civil society development, tolerance and confidence-building – Atinati, USAID, CCE, CHCA, SC, UMWOMEN • Gender awareness raising – GSN, XENON, USAID, UNWOMEN • Health risk reduction - HIV/AIDs, C Hepatitis, drug-addiction – XENON The overarching goal of the aforementioned implementing organisations and their projects in Samegrelo- Zemo Svaneti is both twofold and interrelated. At the core of their work is the aim to build local human capacities in order to develop individual livelihoods and foster the integration process. The frequently declared focus upon IDPs is natural since the region has the largest concentration of displaced citizens outside of the capital. The activities under the majority of these projects, however, are not limited to IDP assistance but are also designed to reach wider positive outcomes for the host community as another target social group especially in cases when the aim is to support the social or socio-economic integration 20 of the displaced into local communities (NRC, DRC, UNDP projects). The practice has proved that full and successful integration is a two-way process which requires working with both groups of society. Some examples from specific projects and programmes in Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti are highlighted as follows.

UNDP Human Security and Social Integration Project (HuSSIP) represents, in particular, the example of an integrated response to Georgia’s chronic IDP challenge, encompassing host communities as well.35 The programme description indicates engaging in activities of deliberate and strategic transition from recovery efforts to long-term development through providing assistance to the Georgian Government. The programme has adopted the human security approach which is rooted in a multi-sectoral, four component development: 1. Community development (elaboration of an effective two-way government-society interaction, community development plans; identification and implementation of the most important community infrastructure and village development projects). 2. Supporting SMEs/livelihoods and employment generation (improved access to financial resources, consultations and trainings in business skills, providing knowledge and best practice examples to small farmers on how to improve production through the agro-TV programme Farmer’s Diary). 3. Access to justice and public awareness (improved services to IDPs and local communities in need, access to legal aid, civic education for displaced and local youth, raising public awareness of human rights). 4. Confidence-building (development of conflict sensitive peace-building skills amongst communities and local authorities, networking and advocacy, parallel technical assistance through designing and implementing development intervention across the ABL in agriculture/plant protection fields). A multi-sectoral approach also characterises theUSAID projects (see http://georgia,usaid.go/node/1110 for detailed information) including two-way government-society interaction through improved co-operation between authorities and civil society:36 1. Good Governance in Georgia project – G3 (addresses the diverse challenges/ shortcomings in governance at the national and local levels, improves transparency and institutional efficiency at all levels of government in providing better services to citizens as well as communication channels between government institutions, stakeholders, civil society and citizens; promotes more responsive, professional and engaged local governance in Zugdidi. The project also provides a public gathering space dedicated to civic discourse through CCE in Zugdidi). 2. Development in Georgia – G-PAC (supports economic growth opportunities as well as community mobilisation and civil society development; in particular, civic monitoring of the Zugdidi-Mestia road construction work and protecting the rights of people with autism). 3. Education (Applied Civic Education and Teacher Training (ACETT) improves the quality and scope of school-based civic education to positively influence the knowledge, attitudes and behaviours of youth, empowering them to be active participants in building a democratic society). 4. Empower Women of Samegrelo (provides marketable technical and vocational training to at least 350 women in Tsalenjikha over a two-year period, improves the cultural and traditional family practices towards supporting female-controlled economic resources, extends financial and material support to businesses by issuing small grants and linking this targeted population to local microcredit organisations). 5. HIV Prevention project (supports HIV prevention amongst high-risk groups in Georgia in order to avert the spread of HIV to the general population, supports stigma reduction, capacity-building training, counselling and testing in Zugdidi). 6. Georgia Sustaining Family Planning and Maternal and Child Health Services Project – Sustain (meets critical maternal and child health and family planning needs, supports a maternal and child health centre in Zugdidi, supports sustainable family planning throughout the region). 7. Nursing Vocational Education project (improves the competencies of nurses currently practicing in Georgia through an intensive training course, promotes good management skills acquisition, sets a long-term goal to establish a degree-granting school of nursing in co-operation with the Georgian Government). 21 8. Georgian Media Enhance Democracy, Informed Citizenry and Accountability – G-MEDIA (improves the public’s access to a range of news sources and information by developing a more politically balanced, editorially independent and professional media able to deliver news, information and analysis to audiences). 9. Economic Prosperity Initiative – EPI (will improve Georgia’s overall economic competitiveness through assistance designed to expand and deepen the country’s economic governance capacity, improve agriculture sector productivity and strengthen targeted non-agricultural value chains that have the highest growth potential. Amongst other activities, EPI is conducting trainings for 680 local hazelnut growers in Zugdidi at EPI Knowledge Plots at the Ferrero company’s plantation). 10. Social Infrastructure project (provided enhanced learning and living conditions for orphans and vulnerable children. The project also improved the short-term economic status of ethnic minorities, IDPs and graduates of the vocational education programmes by employing them in the rehabilitation of schools in Senaki, Poti, Chaladidi, Koki, Orsantia, Narazeni, Rike, Tkaia, Chkhoria, Pakhulani, Muzhava, Chale, Jvari and Khaburne, as well as rehabilitating small group homes in Tsalenjikha, Sachino Mazandara and Chokhorotsku). An important component in addressing the challenges in the region is the involvement of mass media into responsive actions. The UNDP’s Farmer’s Diary television programme is considered very helpful and has become very popular in the region.37 Radio Atinati, supported by UNDP and other donors, has broadcast interactive talk-shows on human rights dating to the early 2000s. Moreover, covering 800,000 people and including Gali residents on the other side of the conflict zone, the radio has a unique opportunity to contribute to the empowerment of its audience and the promotion of tolerance, confidence and peacebuilding through its diverse programmes.

STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESS OF THE PROGRAMMES

An assessment can be made in terms of the current programmes being implemented in Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti in regard to their responses to the challenges that influence the quality of life of the population in the region. The particular features taken into consideration are assessed against the following criteria: 1. Relevance towards the needs and priorities of the region (improved quality of life through employment and poverty reduction and provision of quality education and health care access, first of all). 2. Integration of IDPs into local communities (the process and the outcome). 3. Empowerment of vulnerable groups (IDPs, people with special needs, elderly, children). 4. Gender sensitivity, including SGBV. 5. Partnership with the Georgian Government and civil society and co-ordination with other stakeholders. 6. Building peace, confidence and tolerance. The assessment herein is based upon a so-called desk study of the documents available on the websites of the organisations involved (see Annex 3). Some of the information was also kindly provided by key respondents. In addition, nine in-depth interviews and two group discussions were held with local administration representatives in Zugdidi as well as with UNDP and local NGOs and civil society representatives in Zugdidi, Jvari and Tbilisi (see Annex 1). The information gained from the desk study, interviews and group discussions enables the following conclusions: • With different ranges of explicitness, all of the reviewed programmes/projects state that their aim is to contribute to the welfare (quality of life, in other words) of their target groups through making adequate and effective response to the existing needs. 22 • The majority of the programmes declare or, at least, imply the necessity of transition from emergency and post-emergency aid to development efforts. In this regard, some of the emergency aid organisations have even reduced their presence in the country. (In accordance with its strategic plan for 2010-11, NRC Georgia phased out its Education and Shelter Programmes last year). • Contribution to full psycho-social and socio-economic integration of the displaced into local communities is a target goal (for a number of projects). • Some of the projects focus upon vulnerable groups, especially IDPs and children, with a fewer number on the population with special needs and, rarely, the elderly. • Although attention to gender issues has been set as a requirement by almost all donors, the most effective actions are undertaken by those organisations that include gender sensitivity in their mission statements. • Co-ordination and partnership is still an issue for a number of programmes although there is a tendency towards positive interrelations amongst stakeholders. • Co-ordination between different governmental agencies and different levels of administration leaves room for improvement. As for impact of the programmes, it is early to look at the long-term effects with only their strengths and weaknesses able to be identified at this stage (see also Annex 4 for a table of strengths and weaknesses). The strengths of the programmes include: • Strong focus upon transition from post-emergency aid to development efforts. • Tendency to tailor projects to local situations, improved needs assessment. • Multi-sectoral approach, concentrating simultaneously upon various spheres (diversity) that need support in development. • Integrated approach which aims to include local host communities as the other important target group along with IDPs. • Encouragement of the Georgian Government for more transparency and its accountability to civil society. • Partnership with regional local administration. • Focus upon empowerment through education (vocational education, human rights education). • Focus upon empowerment of youth. • Increased efforts for adult education (skills training). • Increased attention towards a healthy lifestyle. • Involvement of mass media in project implementation. • Relatively long-term (four-to-five years) projects (continuity). Weaknesses: • Insufficient attention to the groups still in need of emergency assistance. • Insufficient differentiation in approaches towards the needs of different vulnerable community members. • Insufficient attention to long-term “post-programme” situation and needs (e.g., situation with employment of graduates from vocational training courses). • Insufficient outreach (e.g., lack of proper attention to the needs of the elderly and their empowerment). • Insufficient efforts to empower “ordinary people” for good citizenship (age groups other than youth members). • Insufficient efforts for environmental protection awareness amongst the population. • Lack of co-ordination between different levels of local administration, even those that are included in the same programme. • Lack of strategic, long-term efforts for improved relationships between Georgian and Abkhaz communities across the conflict zone. The above overview providing a summary of the strengths and weaknesses of the reviewed programmes can hopefully contribute to drafting and submitting recommendations (including opportunities and threats) 23 for future developmental efforts and activities in Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti.

Conclusions/Recommendations Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti has been one of the most adversely affected areas in Georgia over the past two decades. Civil war in the early 1990s, the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict whose consequences continue to be felt in the region and the devastating impact of the August 2008 war with Russia have negatively influenced both the socio-economic situation, in general, and the quality of life of almost every single family, in particular, with specific focus upon IDPs, orphans and single elderly people as the community’s most vulnerable. Despite the fact that the region has been the recipient of humanitarian aid and development assistance and that there have been some positive developments within, no significant improvements related to the quality of life (either amongst locals or IDPs) have hitherto been observed. There is hope that the recently adopted State Regional Development Strategy and its Action Plan for 2011-15, which involve addressing the key priorities of environmental, economic and social issues, will contribute to the sustainable development of the region. In this regard, special attention should be paid to support the revival of the region’s traditional agriculture with a focus upon ecologically clean production and the search and expansion of the market for its realisation. At the same time, systematic efforts should be made to create a more favourable environment for building trust and, therefore, the improvement of relationships between the Georgian and Abkhaz communities along the zone of conflict. The precedent of successful co-operation between the parties on the Enguri Dam prompts the patterns to develop projects which consider the mutual interests of the groups in conflict and, further therefore, could contribute to the normalisation of relations. In addition, some initiatives, involving a wider range of actors, participants and or suggesting awider geographical area, may be also beneficial. In this regard, the implementation of the pre-election promises of the ruling coalition—to create a modern and technically equipped medical centre and to open a higher medical school upon its basis—may become attractive not only for the whole Caucasus but also for Russia and Turkey. REFERENCES (Endnotes) 1 Even an approximate number of these people is impossible to identify. Moreover, no official population figures of Georgian returnees to Gali exist since their return is not recognised by the Georgian Government or international organisations. According to the UNDP Conflict-Related Development Analysis, somewhere between 40,000 and 140,000 displaced Georgians have returned to the Gali District of Abkhazia (Karen Attiah, Janine White, May 2012). Since it is widely believed (and this belief is supported with some experience) that passing checkpoints are less “dangerous” for females, women are the ones who usually move to and fro across the “border” (Information source: Key respondent. See Annex 1 for a list of the key respondents and group discussants providing information for this report.) 2 This is different from a general criminal situation on site with almost all key respondents mentioning positive dynamics in this respect and praising the police reform (Source: individual interviews and group discussions.) 3 Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti Regional Administration webpage accessible at http://www.szs.gov.ge/cgi-bin/admin/show_ menu_geo.pl?prfile=15.db 4 Cf. “A Place of One’s Own,” Norwegian Refugee Council’s Individual House Construction (2002-2009) in West Georgia, Tbilisi, August 2011, p. 11. 5 It is not easy, however, to obtain even temporary employment: “...very few people from our village were able to obtain temporary work at the construction site, they (construction companies) bring in their own people, they do not need us.” Ibid. 6 Group discussion in Jvari: “Approximately 60% of the male population of Jvari worked on the construction of the Jvari- Mestia road this summer.” 7 UNDP Country Reports and other documents, accessible at http://www.undp.org.ge. 8 Partial Progress towards Durable Solutions for IDPs, NRC/IDMC Report, 21 March 2012 accessible at http://www. internaldisplacement.org/8025708F004CE90B/(httpCountrySummaries)/914EF89B33D76029C12579C300519892?OpenD ocument&count=10000. 9 UNDP Country Programme 2011-2015, p. 2, accessible at http://www.unpd.org.ge. 10 National Statistics Office of Georgia (GEOSTAT) accessible at http://www.geostat.ge/index.php?action=page&p_ id=32&lang=eng11 11 Cf. ”The government reports an unemployment rate of about 16 per cent (Georgian Government, 25 May 2011) but some experts state the figure is around 32 per cent (DRC, 5 October 2010)” in Partial Progress towards Durable Solutions for IDPs, NRC/IDMC Report, 21 March 2012 accessible at http://www.internal-displacement.org/8025708F004CE90B/(httpCountryS ummaries)/914EF89B33D76029C12579C300519892?OpenDocument&count=10000. 12 Individual interviews and group discussions. 13 Ministry for Internally Displaced Persons from the Occupied Territories, Accommodation and Refugees of Georgia (MRA). 24 14 Partial Progress towards Durable Solutions for IDPs, Op. cit. 15 UNDP Country Programme 2011-2015 accessible at http://www.unpd.org.ge. 16 Key respondent. 17 Not Displaced, Out of Place, NRC Study, Tbilisi, 2010. 18 Thematic Study on Specific Issues Related to IDP Education in Georgia, NRC Georgia, Tbilisi, 2008-09. 19 Abkhaz public schools, frequently referred to as Abkhaz schools in exile, were established in the early 1990s for the IDP children. Although formally under the supervision of the Georgian Ministry of Education and Science, these schools are in fact managed the Ministry of Education and Culture of the Autonomous Republic of Abkhazia in Exile. Both teachers and students in these schools are mostly IDPs. 20 http://www.meca.gov.ge 21 Partial Progress towards Durable Solutions for IDPs. p. 6. 22 Key respondent, group discussion data. 23 Aging in Displacement: Assessing Health Status of Displaced Older Adults in the Republic of Georgia, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and the Institute for Policy Studies, April 2012, accessible at http://www.jhsph.edu/ research/centers-and-institutes/center-for-refugee-and-disaster-response/publications_tools/GEORGIA%20PRM%20 OLDER%20ADULT%20STUDY%2001May2012.pdf 24 Ibid., p. 2. 25 Key respondents. 26 Key respondent. 27 Key respondent, group discussion data. 28 Key respondent. 29 Key respondent. 30 Key respondent, group discussion data. 31 “Georgia has gone through challenging and tumultuous years since the new Government came to the power after the Rose Revolution in 2004. The ambitious programme of wide-ranging liberal market reforms produced impressive economic growth in the period of 2004-2007 where high levels of FDI inflow fuelled significant GDP growth reaching 12.3% in 2007. Infrastructure, services, construction and large-scale privatisation were the drivers of growth. Impressive economic growth was accompanied by increasing unemployment (up by 4% in five years since 2004) and increased vulnerabilities with 23.6% of the population living below the poverty line and 9.3% in extreme poverty (2008 data). See UNDP Country Programme 2011-2015, p. 2. 32 UNDP Country Programme 2006-2011 accessible at http://www.undp.org.ge. 33 UNDP Country Programme 2011-2015. 34 Key respondent. 35 UNDP Factsheet – HuSSIP –Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti. 36 http://georgia.usaid.gov/node/1110 37 Key respondents and group discussion data. ANNEX 1

List of Key Respondents and Participants of Group Discussions

Key Respondents 1. Florian Delaunay, Project Manager, UNDP, Zugdidi 2. Maia Chanturia, Director, Education Centre, Jvari 3. Tinatin Kalichava, Executive Director, NGO Atinati, Zugdidi 4. Kristine Kilanava, Chairperson, NGO Imedi, Zugdidi 5. Manana Kvachakhia, Head of Department, Ministry of Education and Culture (Government of Abkhazia in Exile), Tbilisi 6. Gocha Lipartia, Director, Jvari Out-Patient Clinic, Jvari 7. Gela Svirava, Head of Department, Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti Regional Development Office, Zugdidi 8. Tamar Tavartkiladze, Expert, Project Manager at UNWOMEN, Tbilisi 9. Lika Zakashvili, Journalist, Liberali, Tbilisi

Participants of Group Discussions Zugdidi 1. Iago Pasandze, NGO representative 2. Bidzina Gabiskiria, Government of Abkhazia in Exile 3. Rusudan Makatsaria, Social Worker 4. Anna Nachkebia, Journalist 5. Eka Parulava, Journalist 6. Lana Gogia, Lawyer 7. Guliada Sichinava, Teacher 8. Marina Jojua, Journalist 25 9. Lana Demura, NGO representative

Jvari 1. Manana Kakulia, IDP 2. Nestan Chkhaberia, Educator 3. Nestan Gogokhiya, Medical Doctor 4. Gocha Lipartia, Medical Doctor 5. Nugzar Shonava, NGO representative 6. George Malazogiya, IDP 7.Tamar Telia, Journalist 8. Natia Balishvili, IDP ANNEX 2 Programmes in Samegrelo Zemo Svaneti (Regional Department Database, 2012)

Agency Name: United Nation Development Programme Abreviation: UNDP

III. PROFILE IN SAMEGRELO-ZEMO I. CONTACT DETAILS II. GENERAL AGENCY PROFILE SVANETI REGION 191 Rustaveli Street, Community Participation Postal Adress Zugdidi 2100 - Municipal and community development Telephone no plans. Fax no UNDP is the UN’s global - Community projects: rehabilitation of kindergartens, water supply and bridges. URW/Website development network focused on helping countries build and share Vocational Education & Training (VET)

solutions to the challenges of: - VET centres in Zugdidi at Shota Meskhia Head Of Agency Jamie McGoldrick Democratic Governance, Poverty University and in Poti city at the College UNDP Resident Reduction, Crisis Prevention Phazisi. Designation Representative and Recovery, Environment and Business Support Centres jamie.mcgoldrick@ Energy and HIV/AIDS. UNDP helps - Business education and information E-mail undp.org developing countries attract and use centers in Zugdidi and in Poti city. Mobile no aid effectively. UNDP established its Household Agricultural Television presence in Georgia in 1993. In all Programmes, Farmer’s Diary

of its activities, it encourages the - Broadcast through five regional Focal Person Florian Delaunay protection of human rights and the television stations. Designation Project Manager empowerment of women. Public Awareness on IDPs Issues florian.delaunay@ - Radio talk-show Discussions of Our E-mail undp.org Rights via Atinati. Mobile no 599909137 Justice and Rule of Law / Access to Social Services 26 IV. GEOGRAPHICAL FOCUS V. THEMATIC FOCUS - Outreach visits to IDPs and host Abasha Natural Disaster Risk Response x communities for provision of legal Durable Housing & Non Food Chkhorotsku consultations and legal assistance. Items - Capacity building of municipal social Khobi x Water & Sanitation units (trainings, technical capacity). Martvili Food Security & Nutrition Confidence Building Mestia Education & Vocational Training xx - Capacity building of local authorities and communities through trainings, Human Rights, Protection and Poti x xx referral mechanism and advocacy. Gender - Supporting regional co-ordination Senaki x Early Recovery x of activities of local/international Tsalenjikha x Health organisations in the region, facilitation of Livelihood, Income Generation communication/co-ordination amongst Zugdidi x xx and Business Development state and non-state stakeholders. VII. HUMAN RESOURCES AND VI. TARGET GROUPS Confidence Building xx FIELD PRESENCE IDPs Capacity Building xx Staff in SZS: 9 Governance, Democracy and Host communities xx Nana Chapidze Tsira Kakubava Civil Society Project Co- ordinator, Project Co-ordinator, Community Local governments Co-ordination xx Rule of Law and Participation Confidence Building and Business Development nana.chapidze@ tsira.kakubava@ Social services of the municipalities undp.org.ge undp.org.ge Youth, farmers, start-up 599371025 599 949 686 businessmen VET students, women

Agency Name: Human Rights Centre Abreviation: HRIDC

III. PROFILE IN SAMEGRELO-ZEMO I. CONTACT DETAILS II. GENERAL AGENCY PROFILE SVANETI REGION 38 K. Gamsakhurdia The HRIDC aims to increase respect Postal Adress Street, 2100 Zugdidi for human rights, fundamental Telephone no (+995 415) 5 3768 freedoms and facilitate the peacebuilding process in Georgia. Fax no To achieve this goal it is essential • Legal aid, free-of-charge. URW/Website www.humanrights.ge to ensure that authorities respect • Distance online education with the rule of law and principles of Swedish university. transparency and separation of Head Of Agency David Patsatsia • Collaboration meeting and forum for powers, to eliminate discrimination Designation Co-ordinator local NGO community. at all levels, increase awareness dpatsatsia@yahoo. Activities: E-mail and respect for human rights com • Monitoring and documenting human a m o n g s t t h e p e o p l e i n G e o r g i a . rights violations in Georgia. Mobile no 599479905 HRIDC Priority Areas: • Reporting on the human rights • Strengthening the rule of law situation in Georgia to the EU, Council Focal Person • Supporting freedom of expression of Europe, OSCE, UN, ICC and others and media Designation international bodies upon a regular • Promoting equality and social E-mail basis. inclusion • Lobbying and advocacy of legislative • Supporting transitional justice and policy reforms before national and Mobile no • Reinforcement of democratic international institutions. processes • Litigating cases on human rights IV. GEOGRAPHICAL FOCUS V. THEMATIC FOCUS violations through Legal Aid Centre, free- Abasha Natural Disaster Risk Response of-charge. Durable Housing & Non Food • Public awareness raising on human Chkhorotsku Items rights situation in Georgia by daily- 27 updatable bilingual online magazine Khobi x Water & Sanitation www.HumanRights.ge and video-portal Martvili Food Security & Nutrition www.hridc.tv Mestia Education & Vocational Training x • Networking amongst human rights Human Rights, Protection and organisations at national and regional Poti x xx Gender levels. Senaki x Early Recovery Tsalenjikha x Health Livelihood, Income Generation Zugdidi x and Business Development VII. HUMAN RESOURCES AND VI. TARGET GROUPS Confidence Building x FIELD PRESENCE People in need of legal aid Capacity Building x Governance, Democracy and Youth, students x Civil Society NGO community Co-ordination x 2 staff members, 2 probationers, 1-2 interns, 12 local volunteers.

Agency Name: Charity Humanitarian Centre Abkhazeti Abreviation: CHCA

III. PROFILE IN SAMEGRELO-ZEMO I. CONTACT DETAILS II. GENERAL AGENCY PROFILE SVANETI REGION 21 Tabukashvili Postal Adress Street, Zugdidi Charity Humanitarian Centre Telephone no +995 315 25 19 21 Abkhazeti (CHCA) is the premiere Project Title: IDP Vocational Training and Fax no Georgian non-governmental Service Centre (VTSC) URW/Website www.chca.org.ge organisation focused upon Project Donor: UNHCR empowering Georgia’s internally Project Duration: 01.01.2011 – Head Of Agency Eka Gvalia displaced and other vulnerable 31.12.2011 Target Area: Zugdidi Designation Executive Director populations. Established in 1995 in response to the thousands of Project Title: Provision of Services for E-mail [email protected] Georgian IDPs created by violent Capacity Building & Social Integration Mobile no conflict with the region of Abkhazia, Activities in Samegrelo CHCA has since implemented a Project Donor: UNDP Focal Person Eliso Lolua wide range of programming from Project Duration: 01.07.2011 – 30.06.2012 Zugdidi Office education and micro-finance to Designation Target Area: Zugdidi, Poti, Khobi, Senaki, Manager emergency relief and housing assistance. Tsalenjikha E-mail [email protected] Project Title: Economically Empowering Mobile no +995 599915436 Georgia’s Conflict-Affected Populations IV. GEOGRAPHICAL FOCUS V. THEMATIC FOCUS Project Donor: Stichting Vluchteling – Abasha Natural Disaster Risk Response Dutch Refugee Foundation Durable Housing & Non Food Project Duration: 01.04.2011 – Chkhorotsku x Items 30.06.2012 Target Area: Zugdidi Khobi x Water & Sanitation Project Title: Regional Children Action 28 Martvili Food Security & Nutrition for Participation Mestia Education & Vocational Training xx Project Donor: Save the Children/ Human Rights, Protection and European Union Poti x x Gender Project Duration: 01.02.2011 – Senaki x Early Recovery 30.04.2012 Tsalenjikha x Health x Target Area: Zugdidi Livelihood, Income Generation Zugdidi x xx and Business Development VII. HUMAN RESOURCES AND VI. TARGET GROUPS Confidence Building xx FIELD PRESENCE 19 full-time Capacity Building xx employees • IDPs, returnees, host communities Governance, Democracy and xx Irakli Tabagua Irakli Kochua • Persons with special needs Civil Society • Youth Project Co-ordination xx Project Manager • Business beginners, business expanders, Manager SMEs cb@chca. [email protected]. • Farmers org.ge ge • Local governments/municipalities +995 • Social Services Agency of Georgia +995 593520267 597086353

Agency Name: Danish Refugee Council Abreviation: DRC

III. PROFILE IN SAMEGRELO-ZEMO I. CONTACT DETAILS II. GENERAL AGENCY PROFILE SVANETI REGION 64 Gamsakhurdia Livelihood Street, Zugdidi DRC provides three categories of Postal Adress 50 Tamar Mepe income-generation assistance in Street, Poti Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti: Telephone no 0415 22 13 80 1. The small business grant provides to The overall objective of DRC Fax no expand existing businesses or support activities in the South Caucasus start-ups to launch business activities URW/Website www.drc.dk is to promote durable solutions (Zugdidi, Poti, Senaki, Jvari). for displaced and conflict affected 2. Food security grant creates no income Head Of Agency Blerim Muxaheri populations. but decreases burden of securing West Georgia survival (Zugdidi, Senaki, Poti, Khobi, Designation Programme Manager DRC has been operating in the South Tsalenjikha, Jvari, Chkhorotsku, Svaneti). Caucasus since 1996. It targets E-mail [email protected] 3. SME grant provides employment and IDPs and refugees in the areas of Mobile no 599 27 14 17 pushes the local economy (Zugdidi, community rehabilitation, shelter, Senaki, Poti).

civil society development and micro Shelter Activities Focal Person Mzevi Jojua enterprise/income generation. 1. Durable shelter assistance for IDPs in Livelihood Co- Samegrelo. Designation ordinator 2. Improving living conditions through E-mail [email protected] rehabilitation of houses for most Mobile no 591 19 16 17 vulnerable residents and IDPs in Zugdidi district. IV. GEOGRAPHICAL FOCUS V. THEMATIC FOCUS 3. Rehabilitation of the infrastructure Abasha x Natural Disaster Risk Response projects in the villages of Zugdidi district Durable Housing & Non Food Chkhorotsku x xx based on the results of community 29 Items mobilisation. Community Mobilisation Khobi x Water & Sanitation 1. Mobilisation of community. Martvili x Food Security & Nutrition 2. Strengthening of the socio-economic Mestia x Education & Vocational Training infrastructure through elaboration of Village Development Plans in Zugdidi Human Rights, Protection and Poti x xx district. Gender Durable Housing and Governance Senaki x Early Recovery 1. Profiling of IDPs received durable Tsalenjikha x Health housing assistance by government. 2. Technical assessment of IDP apartment blocks. Livelihood, Income Generation 3. Integration assessment. Zugdidi x xx and Business Development 4. Resettlement monitoring. 5. Support to MRA in privatisation process. VII. HUMAN RESOURCES AND VI. TARGET GROUPS Confidence Building FIELD PRESENCE IDPs Capacity Building xx 17 in Zugdidi Office Governance, Democracy and Host communities xx 8 in Poti Office Civil Society Local governments Co-ordination Socially vulnerable population Communities

Agenye Name: Save the Children Abreviation: SC III. PROFILE IN SAMEGRELO-ZEMO I. CONTACT DETAILS II. GENERAL AGENCY PROFILE SVANETI REGION 20 Gotua Street, Save the Children (SC) is the world’s The duration of the SC Understand- Postal Adress Tbilisi, Georgia 0160 leading independent organisation for ing and Improving the Impact of Telephone no 00995 322 244 520 children. Its vision is a world in which Youth Confidence-Building Initiatives Fax no 00995 322 377 963 every child attains the right to - sur in the Samegrelo Region project was vival, protection, development and November 2010 - December 2011. www. URW/Website participation. Its mission is to inspire Understanding youth in the general popu- savethechildren.org breakthroughs in the way the world lation. SC conducted qualitative research treats children and to achieve imme- to understand how young people in con- Head Of Agency diate and lasting change in their lives. flict-affected areas experience conflict and Designation Since 1994, SC has been a trusted how they mitigate it in their everyday lives. E-mail NGO helping vulnerable and or dis- Knowing more about youth participating Mobile no placed families and promoting civil in current confidence building projects. society development in Georgia, This activity assesses, from the youth’s

including Abkhazia. Regionally and point of view, the most significant changes Focal Person Tamar Dagargulia globally, SC is recognised as a leader in confidence-building they have experi- Designation Project Co-ordinator in youth development programming enced in their everyday lives by being in- tdagargulia@ with a broad range of programmes volved in a COBERM- or IfS-funded project. E-mail savechildren.org in formal and non-formal settings for Drafting a youth confidence-building KAP youth ages 14 to 24. In partnership tool. Following the qualitative research with relevant government agencies described above, SC drafted a KAP tool and community entities, SC is- ex to measure the impact of COBERM, IfS Mobile no 599 47 38 31 pert at designing methodologies and and other donor-funded activities on tools for youth civic engagement, youth living in conflict-affected areas. livelihoods and employment training Map youth-focused projects related to con- and life skills development. fidence building to understand more pre- IV. GEOGRAPHICAL FOCUS V. THEMATIC FOCUS cisely what activities are in place in order Abasha Natural Disaster Risk Response to identify opportunities for synergies and collaboration and to understand current Durable Housing & Non Food Chkhorotsku organisational capacities amongst NGOs, Items especially COBERM project implementers. 30 Khobi Water & Sanitation Organise two thematic networking meetings Martvili Food Security & Nutrition each in Samegrelo and Abkhazia with NGOs Mestia x Education & Vocational Training focused upon youth and confidence building. Human Rights, Protection and Organise virtual meetings between NGOs Poti x xx Gender in Samegrelo and Abkhazia. SC hosted Senaki x Early Recovery dialogues and discussions amongst NGOs to promote information sharing and idea Tsalenjikha x Health exchange as well as debate about key issues affecting organisations and the young people with whom they work. Under the UNICEF supported project Strengthening Child Care Services and Systems, support the Social Service Agency (SSA) to ensurecomprehensive assessments, individual care planning Livelihood, Income Generation Zugdidi x and monitoring in Tsalenjikha, Zugdidi and Business Development and Mestia 24-hour care institutions. Regional Children Action for Participation (ReCAP) – November, 2010 - June, 2012. The overall project objective was to empower children to play a leading role in their own development and the development of their communities through meaningful participation at local, national and regional levels. VII. HUMAN RESOURCES AND VI. TARGET GROUPS Confidence Building xx FIELD PRESENCE Youth (14-24 years old) Capacity Building 1 Person Governance, Democracy and 1 Demuria Street, Zugdidi, Teachers Civil Society Georgia, 2100 Parents Co-ordination xx Youth and confidence building focused

NGOs Agency Name: Association “Atinati” Abreviation: III. PROFILE IN SAMEGRELO-ZEMO I. CONTACT DETAILS II. GENERAL AGENCY PROFILE SVANETI REGION 94, Rustaveli Street, Working Directions: Postal Adress Zugdidi, Georgia 1. Education (formal and informal) Telephone no 009955 415 25 00 56 The organisation was established in • Foreign Languages Learning Centre Fax no 009955 415 25 00 54 1995 in Zugdidi. The mission of the • Computer Centre • The organisation participates in the URW/Website www.atinati.org Association “Atinati” is to support the formation of democratic society. “Youth in Action” programme of the Eu-

With the view to achieving this ropean Union and implements Youth Head Of Agency Gia Khasia goal, it has been implementing Exchange and European Voluntary Ser- Head of Governing vice (EVS) projects. It hosts EVS volun- Designation the following programmes: civil Body education, raising awareness of the teers and Georgian volunteers (Zug- E-mail [email protected] youth, development of III Sector and didi) from “Atinati” work in various Mobile no 009955 99 57 54 57 support for vulnerable people. organisations in Europe as volunteers. So far, “Atinati” has implemented 2. Assistance to Civil Society Development

over 80 successful projects at its • Free Informational-Consultative -Ser Focal Person Rusidan Kalichava own resources and through donor vice (ICS) for NGO development func- Designation Executive Director assistance. tions within the association. It gives legal E-mail and informational consultations to the Mobile no 009955 92 56 81 84 representatives of the III Sector - NGOs and CBOs, helps them with preparing IV. GEOGRAPHICAL FOCUS V. THEMATIC FOCUS constitution and registration documen- Abasha x Natural Disaster Risk Response tation and publishes manuals for NGOs. Durable Housing & Non Food Chkhorotsku x The training group at “Atinati” provides Items service in organising and conducting vari- Khobi x Water & Sanitation ous trainings for NGO and governmental Martvili x Food Security & Nutrition representatives, teachers, students and Mestia x Education & Vocational Training x school children. They have a training hall equipped with the latest technologies. Human Rights, Protection and Poti x x 3. Assistance to Vulnerable People. Gender In this direction, “Atinati” has been imple- Senaki x Early Recovery menting several psycho-social rehabilita- Tsalenjikha x Health tion, income generation, community de- 31 velopment and small business development projects. 4. Mass Media Radio “Atinati” has been functioning since 1998 (FM 105’9). It covers 800,000 people. The mission of the radio is to deepen the trust between different levels of the society and promote conflict regulation. It broadcasts 24 hours a day having informational and musical programmes. Projects implemented by “Atinati” aim at: Livelihood, Income Generation Zugdidi x x • deepening trust and Business Development • psychological-social rehabilitation of vulnerable population in the region, including locals and IDPs • integration of IDPs • supporting women IDPs and their families in income generation through small grants • assisting victims of violence • raising public awareness on various issues • NGO sector development • promoting youth development • civil society development VII. HUMAN RESOURCES AND VI. TARGET GROUPS Confidence Building FIELD PRESENCE Locals and IDPs Capacity Building x Staff in SZS: 9 Women and children victims of Governance, Democracy and Iveta Rodonaia violence Civil Society Students and schoolchildren Co-ordination Head, Information Service Women IDPs [email protected] Teachers 009955 77 47 00 16 NGOs Agency Name: Zugdidi Centre for Civil Engagement Abreviation: CCE III. PROFILE IN SAMEGRELO-ZEMO I. CONTACT DETAILS II. GENERAL AGENCY PROFILE SVANETI REGION 52, Rustaveli Street, The United States Agency for Postal Adress Zugdidi, Georgia International Development’s (USAID) Telephone no (0415) 22 38 44 funded project of Centres for Civic Fax no Engagement operates ten Centres across Georgia to provide free URW/Website cce.ge locations for democratic dialogues On 8 February 2012, CCE was opened in amongst its citizens. Zugdidi (52, Rustaveli Street) to offer the Head Of Agency Eka Minjoraia The process of fostering dialogue public places to gather and confidently Designation Co-ordinator is intended to encourage civic engage in open debate and discourse on eminjoraia@msi. engagement and improve E-mail issues of public concern. georgia.com transparency. The CCEs offer free The Zugdidi Centre provides alarge Mobile no 00995 559 47 37 05 meeting spaces for political parties, meeting hall for 60-70 persons, civil society organisations, the conference room, computer lab with five media and the people to discuss Focal Person Natia Bjalava computers and internet (Wi-Fi) for public issues of importance to the citizens use. The Centre is equipped with audio- Deputy CCE Co- of Georgia. Organisations wishing Designation visual devices as well. It has a library ordinator to use the Centres can request the with materials on local government, nbjalava@msi- opportunity to do so under a clear E-mail democracy issues, etc. All of these georgia.com and published set of rules. facilities are for public use aiming at Each Centre for Civic Engagement raising public awareness and developing includes a meeting room. Any of skills to improve communication. non-administrative facilities may be Political parties, civil society scheduled for use through published organisations, independent journalists and defined procedures. and the general public can use the The rooms are rented and equipped Centre free-of-charge for their activities. by USAID, in ten municipalities: Centre staff will organise at least two Ozurgeti, Kutaisi, Telavi, Gori, meetings a month on different issues Mobile no 00995 559 400 399 Zugdidi, Akhaltsikhe, Batumi, with the participation of the members Rustavi, Marneuli and Gurjaani. of political parties and elected officials 32 These facilities and resources are to facilitate their communication with available for general public use people in pre-election periods – 2012 for ensuring access to information parliamentary and 2013 presidential. available on the internet, increasing CCE is operated by two staff members awareness, improving education (Co-ordinator and Deputy Co-ordinator) and skills, and encouraging to ensure its use under a clear and communication. published set of rules. Centre use is IV. GEOGRAPHICAL FOCUS V. THEMATIC FOCUS free-of-charge and can be co-ordinated Abasha x Natural Disaster Risk Response with the local staff or through the CCE Durable Housing & Non Food website: http://www.cce.ge. In addition Chkhorotsku x Items to interesting information about the Khobi x Water & Sanitation CCEs, users will find an interactive calendar of planned events that can be Martvili x Food Security & Nutrition used for booking space for future events. Mestia x Education & Vocational Training CCE business hours 11:00-20:00 Human Rights, Protection and Poti x x Holiday: Sunday Gender Senaki x Early Recovery Tsalenjikha x Health Livelihood, Income Generation Zugdidi x and Business Development VII. HUMAN RESOURCES AND VI. TARGET GROUPS Confidence Building FIELD PRESENCE Political parties Capacity Building Governance, Democracy and Non-formal community groups xx Civil Society Civil society organisations Co-ordination Independent journalists Citizens, authorities Representatives of business and agrarian

sector Agency Name: Gender Network of Samegrelo Abreviation: GNS III. PROFILE IN SAMEGRELO-ZEMO I. CONTACT DETAILS II. GENERAL AGENCY PROFILE SVANETI REGION 92, Rustaveli Street, Postal Adress Zugdidi, Georgia Telephone no 415 220 550 Fax no Gender Network of Samegrelo URW/Website involves thirteen organisations active in the Samegrelo region and

one organisation on the occupied Head Of Agency Nana Todua territories in Abkhazia. Designation Gamgeoba Head The mission of the Gender Network gendernetwork.zu@ of Samegrelo is to improve the E-mail gmail.com gender situation in the Samegrelo Mobile no 577 446 444 region by consolidating the work of the regional NGOs and co-ordinating

efforts to resolve women’s Focal Person Olga Kikava problems. Designation Project Co-ordinator E-mail [email protected] Mobile no 599617847 IV. GEOGRAPHICAL FOCUS V. THEMATIC FOCUS Abasha x Natural Disaster Risk Response Durable Housing & Non Food Chkhorotsku x Items Khobi x Water & Sanitation Martvili x Food Security & Nutrition Mestia Education & Vocational Training x Human Rights, Protection and Poti x xx Gender Senaki x Early Recovery Tsalenjikha x Health x 33 Livelihood, Income Generation Zugdidi x and Business Development VII. HUMAN RESOURCES AND VI. TARGET GROUPS Confidence Building x FIELD PRESENCE Women, children and IDPs living in Capacity Building Samegrelo Governance, Democracy and x Civil Society Co-ordination

Agency Name: Association of Young Psychologists and Doctors XENON Abreviation: XENON III. PROFILE IN SAMEGRELO-ZEMO I. CONTACT DETAILS II. GENERAL AGENCY PROFILE SVANETI REGION 1, Petre Iberi Street, Since 2004, the XENON organisation has Postal Adress XENON is a non-governmental Zugdidi organisation founded on 30 July implemented more than ten projects on Telephone no (+995 415) 25 4010 2004. harm reduction caused by drug use. Since Fax no Its mission is to support psycho- 2005, XENON has been implementing a project funded by the Global Fund – II URW/Website social and medical assistance to the inhabitants of Samegrelo. Component (I lot), HIV/AIDS Prevention XENON objectives: amongst Injecting Drug Users. Head Of Agency Nino Janashia - Psycho-social and medical Along with other NGOs working in Head of Governing assistance for vulnerable groups. the harm reduction field, XENON has Designation Body - Identifying high risk groups and participated in the implementation of ninojanashia@yahoo. assisting in improving the quality of different coalition projects: E-mail com their lives. - Strategic meeting for planning to increase Mobile no 0099599719757 - Popularisation of a healthy lifestyle. the access to C hepatitis medicines in - Women and gender problems. Georgia together with the STEP TO THE

- Collaboration with governmental FUTURE organisation funded by the Open Focal Person Nino Skhulukhia and non-governmental organisations Society Institute. Bridges Project Co- Designation and implementation of joint - Advocacy campaign of the legislative ordinator projects. initiative of the Network of Georgia for ninojanashia@yahoo. XENON is a member of the Georgian Harm Reduction funded by the AIDS E-mail com Harm Reduction Network (GHRN) FOUNDATION EAST WEST. Mobile no 0099557 734 073 and the Samegrelo Gender Network. Ongoing projects: IV. GEOGRAPHICAL FOCUS V. THEMATIC FOCUS Assistance to Families of Missing Persons with the financial assistance of the ICRC. Abasha x Natural Disaster Risk Response Duration: 01.06.2011 – 31.12.2012 Durable Housing & Non Food Chkhorotsku x Types of service under the project: Items - So-called memorial meetings Khobi x Water & Sanitation - Informative meetings with families on Martvili x Food Security & Nutrition legal issues Mestia x Education & Vocational Training xx - Psychological and psycho-social visits - Support groups Human Rights, Protection and 34 Poti x xx The work has covered over 120 families Gender with about 70 families having been Senaki x Early Recovery visited for psychological and psycho-social Tsalenjikha x Health xx assistance. HIV/AIDS Prevention amongst Injecting Drug Users. Assistance to national response to HIV/AIDS prevention in Georgia, improve quality of life of the diseased through improved treatment and care. Duration: 01.07.2011 – 31.12.2012 Types of service under the project: - Testing of injecting drug users (IDU) and their partners on HIV/AIDS, В, С hepatitis, syphilis, with relevant pre/post-test consultations - Distribution of disposable injection systems, Naloxone Livelihood, Income Generation Zugdidi x - Mobile outreach activity and Business Development - Medical, psychological, legal counseling - Counseling for close family/friends of drug users - Peer programme “Peer-Driven Intervention” (PDI) - Management of problematic cases

Bridges project, funded by Open Society – Georgia Foundation. Project goal is the identification of the needs, problems and obstacles of women drug users as the victims of domestic violence to elaborate strategies and guidelines for further advocacy.

Duration: 01.01.2012 – 31.12.2012 Activities: - Conduct survey amongst women drug users - the victims of domestic violence to identify their requests, needs and factors impeding receiving adequate services - Provide psychological aid and services for harm reduction to women IDUs victims of domestic violence - Organise legal trainings for women IDUs - Organise meetings with governmental organisations and NGOs engaged in human rights/women’s rights issues as well as with potential donors; mobilise media resources in the region and centre to review survey results and prepare recommendations. Project : Raise civil society awareness of C hepatitis in Samegrelo.

Activities: - Training of Trainers (TOT) on chronic C hepatitis for physicians of XENON work team and towns of Samegrelo region - Raise awareness of C hepatitis amongst risk groups and society through trainings - Provide media inclusion to cover problematic issues regarding C hepatitis - Organise round table for SZS governmental structures and NGOs and public health authorities 17 physicians of high risk groups have been trained under the project. They work as trainers at their work place or professional 35 community. 13 open trainings have been conducted. Over 130 persons have been informed about C hepatitis

XENON also encourages youth and adolescents towards healthy lifestyle popularisation; it is involved as a volunteer in youth projects (trainings and seminars). VII. HUMAN RESOURCES AND VI. TARGET GROUPS Confidence Building FIELD PRESENCE IDPs (with special attention to youth and Capacity Building x 12 persons women) Governance, Democracy and Host communities x Tsira Dgebuadze Civil Society Local government Co-ordination x [email protected] Youth 00995 99 508 009 Women

Agency Name: Association Imedi, IDP Women’s Movement for Peace Abreviation: Imedi III. PROFILE IN SAMEGRELO-ZEMO I. CONTACT DETAILS II. GENERAL AGENCY PROFILE SVANETI REGION 89, Rustaveli Street, Postal Adress The mission of the organisation Zugdidi, Georgia IMEDI, IDP Women’s Movement for Telephone no (0415) 225 20 29 Peace is the promotion of women’s Fax no participation in conflict resolution www.asociacia-imedi. and peacebuilding as well as their URW/Website ge psycho-social and economical rehabilitation. • education and awareness raising Main directions of its activities: Head Of Agency Kristina Kilanava programmes for women (trainings, - protecttion of the rights of IDPs round tables, discussion/debate, Designation Chair Person and the youth working/informational meetings, forums, kristina-kilanava@ - peace building E-mail conferences). yandex.ru - advocate IDP problems • psychological rehabilitation of IDPs. Mobile no 00599 91 93 22 - non-formal education for women • protect women’s rights and promote and youth their legal strengthening. - publish updated information • involvement in peaceful settlement of Focal Person - research activity Designation Georgian-Abkhaz conflict and confidence - achieve gender equality building process. E-mail - strengthen networking in the • support gender equality and Mobile no region prevention of domestic violence against IV. GEOGRAPHICAL FOCUS V. THEMATIC FOCUS women. Abasha Natural Disaster Risk Response • strengthening of the youth living on Durable Housing & Non Food both sides of borderline to take part in Chkhorotsku Items confidence building process. • stimulate IDPs for involvement in Khobi Water & Sanitation peaceful settlement of conflict. Martvili Food Security & Nutrition • establish and strengthen women Mestia Education & Vocational Training xx network in SZS region. Human Rights, Protection and Poti xx Gender 36 Senaki Early Recovery Tsalenjikha Health Livelihood, Income Generation Zugdidi x and Business Development VII. HUMAN RESOURCES AND VI. TARGET GROUPS Confidence Building xx FIELD PRESENCE 16 persons including contact persons in Women IDPs and local women Capacity Building xx regions Governance, Democracy and Young women x Civil Society Mixed Georgian-Abkhazian families Co-ordination x SZS active leader women Women living in collective places of

settlement

ANNEX 3 Internet Sources Used www.atinati.org/index_eng.shtml www.chca.org.ge www.erc.undp.org/evaluationadmin/downloaddocument.html?docid=597 www.georgia.usaid.gov/node/1110 www.geostat.ge/index.php?action=page&p_id=32&lang=eng11 www.internal-displacement.org/ www.internaldisplacement.org/8025708F004CE90B/(httpCountrySummaries)/914EF89B33D76029C12579C300519892?Ope nDocument&count=10000 www.jhsph.edu/research/centers-and-institutes/center-for-refugee-and-disaster-response/publications_tools/GEORGIA%20 PRM%20OLDER%20ADULT%20STUDY%2001May2012.pdf www.ngowestgeorgia.org/index_geo.html www.meca.gov.ge www.mra.gov.ge www.szs.gov.ge/cgi-bin/admin/show_menu_geo.pl?prfile=15.db www.undp.org.ge/ www.unfpa.org.tr/georgia/index.htm www.unhcr.org/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/page?page=49e48d2e6 www.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2009/04/29/000350881_20090429111740/Rendered/PD F/444000ESW0P1071C0Disclosed041281091.pdf

37 ANNEX 4 Strengths and Weaknesses of Current Programmes in the Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti Region

Strengths Weaknesses Strong focus upon transition from post- Insufficient attention to the groups still in needof emergency aid to development efforts emergency assistance Tendency to tailor projects to local situations, Insufficient differentiation in approaches towards the improved needs assessment needs of different vulnerable community members Multi-sectoral approach, concentrating Insufficient attention to long-term “post-programme” simultaneously upon various spheres (diversity) situation and needs (e.g., situation with employment of that need support in development graduates from vocational training courses) Integrated approach which aims to include local Insufficient outreach host communities as the other important target group along with IDPs Encouragement of the Georgian Government for Lack of proper attention/empowerment to the needs of more transparency and its accountability to civil elderly people society Partnership with regional local administration Insufficient efforts to empower “ordinary people” for good citizenship (age groups other than youth members) Focus upon empowerment through education Insufficient efforts for environmental protection awareness (vocational education, human rights education) amongst population Focus upon empowerment of youth Lack of co-ordination between different levels of local administration, even those that are included in the same programme Increased efforts for adult education (skills Lack of strategic long-term efforts for improved relationships 38 training) between Georgian and Abkhaz communities across the conflict zone Increased attention to a healthy lifestyle Involvement of mass media in project implementation Relatively long-term (four-to-five years) projects (continuity)