ge country profile - finalpprdeast2.eu/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/ge-country-profile-final… ·...
Post on 04-Jul-2020
11 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
CountryProfile
Georgia
December2015
2
Disclaimer
Thecontentsof thisdocumentare thesole responsibilityof itsauthorsandcan innowaybetakentoreflecttheviewsoftheEuropeanUnion.
DraftingAuthors
MichaelElmquist,CivilProtectionKeyExpert
AntoninPetr,CapacityBuildingKeyExpert
PaoloCampanella,ERRAITExpert
PhilLangdale,HostNationSupportExpert
DavideMiozzo,DisasterRiskManagementExpert
RobertoRudari,DisasterRiskPreventionExpert
CoordinationandEditing
SergejAnagnosti,TeamLeader
Acknowledgments
Thisdocumentwasmadepossiblethroughthehardworkandcollaborationofmanyprofessionals,beginningwithOtarKereselidze,DeputyHeadPlanningandPreventionUnitofLEPLEmergencyManagement Agency (department) under theMinistry of Internal Affairs and the PPRD East 2NationalProgrammeCoordinator,andnominatedFocalPointsfromtheEmergencyManagementAgency: Teimuraz Melkadze, Vakhtang Gloveli, Nikoloz Kuchaidze, Ilia Khurtsidze, and LelaElizbarashvili.Wearehugelyindebtedtothefollowinginstitutionsandorganisations:
• EmergencyManagementAgencyundertheMinistryofInternalAffairs
• StateSecurityandCrisisManagementCouncil
• MinistryofForeignAffairs
• MinistryofFinance
• MinistryofEducationandScience
• MinistryofEconomyandSustainableDevelopment
3
• MinistryofEnvironmentandNaturalResourcesProtection
• MinistryofAgriculture
• MinistryofHealth,LabourandSocialAffairs
• StateBorderPolice
• TransportPolice
• NationalEnvironmentalAgency
• MinistryofAgriculture
• StateBorderPolice
• NationalEnvironmentalAgency
• NationalStatisticsOfficeofGeorgia–Geostat
• WaterManagementInstitute
• IliaStateUniversity-InstituteofEarthSciences
• GeorgiaRedCrossSociety
• CaucasusEnvironmentalNGONetworkCENN
• CivilSocietyInstitute
• NGODRRCentre
• CBRNCentresofExcellence
• ClimaEastProject
• UNDP
• UNICEF
• SavetheChildren
• Arbeiter-Samariter-Bund
• TvImedi
WewouldalsoliketothankourcolleagueKakhaberMamuladze,PPRDEast2LocalCoordinatorinGeorgia,whofacilitated in-countrymissions,questionnaires’dissemination,and informationanddatacollection.
4
ListofContentListofContent.....................................................................................................................................................................................4Abbreviations......................................................................................................................................................................................71 ExecutiveSummary................................................................................................................................................................122 CivilProtectionprofile(updateoftheElectronicCivilProtectionOperationalGuidebook)........................14
2.1 Vulnerabilitytoman-madeanddisasterscausebynaturalhazards............................................................142.2 GeneralCountryInformation.....................................................................................................................................152.3 MapofGeorgia...............................................................................................................................................................192.4 FormofGovernment.....................................................................................................................................................192.5 NationalCivilprotectionSystem,MandateandOrganisation........................................................................202.6 OperativeInformation..................................................................................................................................................272.7 Agreements......................................................................................................................................................................272.8 InternationalAssistance...............................................................................................................................................282.9 ListofRelevantContacts..............................................................................................................................................31
3 ProgressmadeintheadoptionofrecommendationsprovidedwithinthePPRDEastProgrammePhase1 34
3.1 Legalframework.............................................................................................................................................................343.2 Institutionalframework...............................................................................................................................................373.3 Conclusion.........................................................................................................................................................................41
4 FloodRiskManagementandapproximationtotheEUFloodsDirective............................................................434.1 Legalandinstitutionalframework............................................................................................................................434.2 Currentstatusofpracticesandareaofexcellence.............................................................................................44
4.2.1 PPRDEastProgrammePhase1.........................................................................................................................454.2.2 InstitutionalBuildingandNaturalDisasterRiskReduction(DRR)inGeorgia(2009-2012)..........454.2.3 SupporttheimplementationprocessoftheEUDirectiveontheassessmentandmanagementoffloodrisksinGeorgia(2013-2015).............................................................................................................................454.2.4 Anti-floodearlywarningandpreventionsystemsinGeorgia:specialfocusonKabaliandDurulirivers(2014-2015,on-going).............................................................................................................................................464.2.5 DevelopingClimateResilientFloodandFlashFloodManagementPracticestoProtectVulnerableCommunitiesofGeorgia(2012-2016,on-going).................................................................................46
5
4.2.6 EnvironmentalProtectiononInternationalRiverBasins(2014-2015,on-going)............................474.3 FindingsandRecommendations...............................................................................................................................474.4 RoadMap..........................................................................................................................................................................49
5 DisasterRiskAssessment.....................................................................................................................................................525.1 Legalandinstitutionalframework............................................................................................................................525.2 Currentstatusofpracticesandareaofexcellence.............................................................................................535.3 FindingsandRecommendations...............................................................................................................................545.4 RoadMap..........................................................................................................................................................................56
6 DisasterLossDataCollectionandProcessing...............................................................................................................586.1 Legalandinstitutionalframework............................................................................................................................586.2 Currentstatusofpracticesandareaofexcellence.............................................................................................596.3 FindingsandRecommendations...............................................................................................................................606.4 RoadMap..........................................................................................................................................................................62
7 InclusionofDisasterRiskReductioninPublicSpending...........................................................................................647.1 Legalandinstitutionalframework............................................................................................................................647.2 Currentstatusofpracticesandareaofexcellence.............................................................................................647.3 FindingsandRecommendations...............................................................................................................................667.4 RoadMap..........................................................................................................................................................................68
8 HostNationSupport..............................................................................................................................................................708.1 Legalandinstitutionalframework............................................................................................................................708.2 Currentstatusofpracticesandareaofexcellence.............................................................................................708.3 FindingsandRecommendations...............................................................................................................................718.4 RoadMap..........................................................................................................................................................................72
9 EUapproachtoVolunteerisminCivilProtection........................................................................................................749.1 Legalandinstitutionalframework............................................................................................................................749.2 Currentstatusofpracticesandareaofexcellence.............................................................................................759.3 FindingsandRecommendations...............................................................................................................................769.4 RoadMap..........................................................................................................................................................................78
10 RaisingAwarenessaboutDisasters................................................................................................................................8010.1 Legalandinstitutionalframework.........................................................................................................................8010.2 Currentstatusofpracticesandareaofexcellence..........................................................................................8010.3 FindingsandRecommendations.............................................................................................................................81
6
10.4 RoadMap........................................................................................................................................................................8111 DataandinformationsharingandINSPIREDirective..............................................................................................83
11.1 Legalandinstitutionalframework.........................................................................................................................8311.2 Currentstatusofpracticesandareaofexcellence..........................................................................................8311.3 FindingsandRecommendations.............................................................................................................................8411.4 RoadMap........................................................................................................................................................................85
12 ERRA.........................................................................................................................................................................................8612.1 Institutionalframework.............................................................................................................................................8612.2 CurrentstatusofInstallationsandUse................................................................................................................8612.3 FindingsandRecommendations.............................................................................................................................8712.4 RoadMap........................................................................................................................................................................88
13 Annexes...................................................................................................................................................................................90Annex1-HNSSOPtemplate
Annex2–ListofInterlocutors
7
Abbreviations
AA AssociationAgreement
ABD AsianDevelopmentBank
BDD BasicDataDirections
BSEC BlackSeaEconomicCooperation
CAG CountryAdvisoryGroup
CE CouncilofEurope
CENN CaucasusEnvironmentalNGONetwork
CIS CommonwealthofIndependentStates
CP CivilProtection
CSI CivilSocietyInstitute
DEA DataExchangeAgency
DEMP DisasterEmergencyManagementPlan
DGECHO Directorate-GeneralforHumanitarianAidandCivilProtection
DLD DisasterLossData
DRA DisasterRiskAssessment
DRM DisasterRiskManagement
DRR DisasterRiskReduction
EADRCC Euro-AtlanticDisasterResponseCoordinationCentre
EaP EasternPartnership
EAPC Euro-AtlanticPartnershipCouncil
EBRD EuropeanBankforReconstructionandDevelopment
ENPI EuropeanNeighbourhoodandPartnershipInstrument
EMA(previouslyEMD)
EmergencyManagementAgencyoftheMinistryofInternalAffairsofGeorgia
EMD EmergencyManagementDepartmentoftheMinistryofInternalAffairsofGeorgia
EPIRB TheEnvironmentalProtectiononInternationalRiverBasinsProject
ERRA ElectronicRegionalRiskAtlas
EU EuropeanUnion
8
EUFD EUFloodsDirective
EUR EURO(EuropeanMonetaryUnit)
EWS EarlyWarningSystem
FAO FoodandAgricultureOrganization
FHM FloodHazardMapping
FMP FloodManagementPlan
FRM FloodRiskMapping
FRMP FloodRiskManagementPlan
GCTU GeneralConfederationofTradeUnions
GEL GeorgianLari(Georgiannationalcurrency)
GIS GeographicInformationSystem
GRC GeorgianRedCrossSociety
GUAM/GUUAM OrganizationforDemocracyandEconomicDevelopment
G-11 GroupofEleven
HFA HyogoFrameworkforAction
HNS HostNationSupport
HNS HostNationSupportGuideline
IAEA InternationalAtomicEnergyAgency
IBRD InternationalBankforReconstructionandDevelopment
ICAO InternationalCivilAviationOrganization
ICC InternationalCriminalCourt
ICRM InternationalCommitteeforRadionuclideMetrology
IDA InternationalDevelopmentAssociation
IFAD InternationalFundforAgricultureDevelopment
IFC InternationalFinanceCorporation
IFRC InternationalFederationoftheRedCrossandRedCrescentSocieties
ILO InternationalLabourOrganization
IMF InternationalMonetaryFund
IMO InternationalMaritimeOrganization
IOC InternationalOlympicCommittee
ICDO InternationalCivilDefenceOrganisation
9
IOM InternationalOrganizationonMigration
IPU Inter-ParliamentaryUnion
IRDR IntegratedResearchonDisasterRisk
ISO InternationalOrganizationforStandardization
IT InformationTechnology
ITSO InternationalTelecommunicationsSatelliteOrganisation
ITU InternationalTelecommunicationUnion
ITUC InternationalTradeUnionConfederation
JN JournalistNetwork
JRC JointResearchCentre
LEMA LocalEmergencyManagementAuthority
MENRP MinistryofEnvironmentandNaturalResourcesProtection
MIGA MultilateralInvestmentGuaranteeAgency
MoES MinistryofEducationandScience
MoF MinistryofFinance
MoJ MinistryofJustice
MoIA MinistryofInternalAffairs
MoU/MOU MemorandumofUnderstanding
MTEF Mid-TermExpenditureFramework
NAPR NationalAgencyofPublicRegistry
NATO NorthAtlanticTreatyOrganization
NEA NationalEnvironmentalAgency
NGO Non-GovernmentalOrganisation
NP NationalPlatform(forDRR)
NSDI NationalSpatialDataInfrastructure
NSDP NationalSustainableDevelopmentPlan
NUTS NomenclatureofTerritorialUnitsforStatistics
OAS OrganizationofAmericanStates
OIF OrganisationInternationaledelaFrancophonie
OCHA OfficefortheCoordinationofHumanitarianAffairs
OPCW OrganizationfortheProhibitionofChemicalWeapons
10
OSCE OrganizationforSecurityandCo-operationinEurope
OSOCC On-SiteOperationalCoordinationCentre
PFP PartnershipforPeace
PFRA PreliminaryFloodRiskAssessment
PPP Public-PrivatePartnership
PPRDEast2Programme
EU-fundedProgrammeforPrevention,PreparednessandResponsetoNaturalandMan-madeDisasterinEaPCountries
PuP Public-PublicPartnership
RBMP RiverBasinManagementPlan
SDI SpatialDataInfrastructure
SELEC SoutheastEuropeanLawEnforcementCentre
SoP(orSOP) StandardOperatingProcedure
SSCMC StateSecurityandCrisisManagementCouncil
TTX Table-TopExercise
UCPM UnionCivilProtectionMechanism
UN UnitedNations
UNCTAD UNConferenceonTradeandDevelopment
UNEP UnitedNationsEnvironmentProgramme
UNESCO UnitedNationsEducational,ScientificandCulturalOrganization
UNICEF UnitedNationsChildren’sFund
UNIDO UnitedNationsIndustrialDevelopmentOrganization
UNINSARAG UnitedNationalInternationalSearchandRescueAdvisoryGroup
UNISDR UnitedNationsStrategyforDisasterReduction
UNWTO UNWorldTourismOrganisation
UoM UnitofManagement
UPU UniversalPostalUnion
USD USDollar(nationalcurrencyofUnitedStatesofAmerica)
UTC CoordinatedUniversalTime
WCO WorldCustomsOrganisation
WFD WaterFrameworkDirective
WHO WorldHealthOrganisation
11
WIPO Worldintellectualpropertyorganization
WMO WorldMeteorologicalOrganisation
WMS WebMapService
WTO Worldtradeorganization
12
1 ExecutiveSummary
Worldwide natural hazards and man-made disasters are on the rise, often leading to loss of lives,displacementofpopulationsanddestructionsofcostly infrastructures.Thesedisasterscanhavedramaticnegativeeffectsontheeconomicgrowthofacountryandcancriticallyunderminetheregion’seffortsforsustainabledevelopment.Itisthereforeoftheupmostimportancethatrisksofdisastersaremitigatedandthatcountriesarebetterpreparedtodealwiththem–individuallyandcollectively.
TheEasternPartnershipFlagshipInitiativeonPrevention,PreparednessandResponsetoNaturalandMan-made Disasters (PPRD East) was launched in 2010 by the European Union to strengthen the countries’resilience, preparedness and response in addressing these challenges. With this regional initiative, theEuropean Union provides the six Eastern Partnership countries (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia,Republic of Moldova and Ukraine) with dedicated assistance to enhance legislative, administrative andoperational civil protection capacities as well as increase access to information on risk exposure andinvolvementofstakeholders.
The5.5millioneuroPhase2ofthePPRDEastProgrammehascommencedinDecember2014andthefirstyear of its implementation has been dedicated to the civil protection capacity building, and to theassessment of the current status of the civil protection and disaster riskmanagement in all six PartnerCountries with an aim to assist and support Partner Countries in their approximation to EU acquiscommunautaireandEUgoodpractiseinthefiledofcivilprotectionanddisasterriskmanagement.TheveryinitialmappingofPartnerCountriesneeds,prioritiesand interestshasbeenundertakenduring thebriefinitialfact-findingmissionsundertakentothePartnerCountriesinFebruary2015,tobefollowedwiththedetailed assessments done through the in-countrymissions, questionnaires and desktop analyses in theperiodApril-September2015.
The following presents the updated draft Country Profile based on information made available to theexpert team. It includes an assessment of national follow-up on PPRD East Programme Phase 1recommendationsaswellasofthefollowingPPRDEast2thematictopics:
1. FloodmanagementandapproximationtotheEUFloodsDirective
2. Disasterriskassessment
3. Disasterlossdatacollectionandprocessing
4. ERRA
5. Inclusionofdisasterriskreductioninpublicspending
6. HostNationSupport
7. EUapproachtovolunteerismincivilprotection
8. Raisingawarenessaboutdisasters
13
9. DataandinformationsharingandINSPIREDirective
Inaddition,thecivilprotectionprofile,presentedintheElectronicCivilProtectionOperationalGuidebook,developed within the PPRD East Programme Phase 1, has been updated. Each Chapter includespresentation of the legal and institutional framework, current status of practice, findings andrecommendations, and the respective roadmapswith concrete suggestions on activities that should beimplementedintheforthcomingperiod.
DraftCountryProfilehasbeenpresented,discussedandvalidatedbytheCountryAdvisoryGroupatandafterthemeetingorganisedon20-22October2015inTbilisi,Georgia.ThefollowingthematictopicshavebeenselectedtobeaddressedwithinthePPRDEast2Programme:
• FloodRiskManagement,DisasterRiskAssessment,DisasterLossDatacomplementedwithERRA,
• INSPIREDirective,and
• HostNationSupport.
For theother, in thisdocumentpresented topics, thePPRDEast2Programmewill assist theEmergencyManagement Agency of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Republic of Georgia and other nationalstakeholdersintransformingherepresentedandacceptedrecommendationsandroadmapsintobankableprojectproposals.ThePPRDEast2willalsoassistallnationalstakeholdersinsearchingforandfindingthemost suitable additional EU assistance instrument and/or the most suitable external bilateral and/ormultilateralfundingmechanism.
14
2 CivilProtectionprofile(updateoftheElectronicCivilProtectionOperationalGuidebook)
2.1 Vulnerabilitytoman-madeanddisasterscausebynaturalhazards
Georgia as a country has a specific geographic location such that it is prone to large-scale naturaldisasters. Themountainous terrainand largechanges inelevationwithinGeorgiacreatenumeroushigh-riskcircumstancesfornaturaldisasters.
• Among the variousnatural disaster threats inGeorgia,flooding is themost frequentwithin thecountry. Flooding and eddy convection are characteristics of almost all rivers in the country,especiallythehigh-riskriverbasinsintheMtskheta-mtianeti,Imereti,SamegrloandGuriaregions.Accordinglywith long termobservations, floodingoccurred inGeorgia 5-6 times annually before1995.TwospecificexamplesoffloodingoccurredintheKurariverbasinin1960andin1987intheRioniRiverbasin,withtotaldamagesexceeding400MillionUSDtoaccompanythelossofhumanlife.
• Due to climatechangeand the fastermeltof the snow that covers themountains in the region,floodingwillcontinuetobeariskforalmostallriverbasinsinGeorgia.Itisobviousthatanincreasein such events could result in the flooding of hundreds of square kilometres, with the heavydamagetorural,agriculturepasturelandsandruralinfrastructure.
• LandslideasatypeofnaturaldisasterisoneofthemostacuteproblemsinGeorgia.Morethan1,5millionhaoflandareinhigh-riskregions,representing22%ofthecountry’sterritory.Currently,53,000districtsareat riskof the landslipdynamicsprocess. It isestimated that70%of landslidespots are occupied by rural populations. During last 40 years, dozens of villages have beenabandonedduetolandslides.Theeffectsofclimatechangecoupledwithfrequentearthquakesandintensified anthropological factors are working to increase the number of landslides with heavyconsequences in Racha-lechkhumi, Adjara, Upper Imereti and the pre-mountain parts ofSamegrelo.
• Georgia is also susceptible tomudflows, with an increasing scale of heterogenicdevelopments.ThefrequentlyrepeatednatureofthisthreatisconsideredtobeoneofthemostcomplicatedissuesintheENPIEastregion.Mudflowasaphenomenonisacharacteristicofallofthemountain landscapesandmorphologicalzonesofGeorgiastartingfromthepiedmontstotheAlpine zones. More than 3,000 spots in various mountain river basins are prone to mudflowdisasters(thetotalarearepresents2millionha).High-riskmudflowzonesencapsulatehundredsof
Basiccountryinformationisvalidatedon19July2015byMrOtarKereselidze,EmergencyManagementAgencyoftheMinistryofInternalAffairsandPPRDEast2NationalProgrammeCoordinatorandbytheCountryAdvisoryGroupatthemeetingheldon20-22October2015.
15
populated places including: Tbilisi, Kvareli, Telavi, Sagarejo, Lagodekhi, Tsageri, Borjomi,Mestia,Lentekhi,Akhaltsikhe,Adigeni,andMtsketa.Duetomudflowsinthesecities,morethan1,500kmofvehicleroads,300kmofrailway,oilpipelinesandirrigationsystemsareunderrisk.Theaverageannualmaterialdamagesamountstoroughly120millionGEL(54.5millionEuro).
• In addition, water erosionprocesses seriously damage the ecosystems of Georgia and have asignificant negative influence on the economy. In Georgia, more than 170,000 ha of land aresufferingfromerosion.Theusageofonehaofarablelandcausestheerosionof150-200tonsofsoil, and during periods of high precipitation this figure rises to 3,000-5,000. Bank wash-uprepresents oneof themost acute problems sincemore than 150ha of land are exposed to thishazard.
• During recent years,droughtas a disaster risk has become a frequent problem. Drought-relateddamages amounted to 40 million GEL for the years 1995-2008. The most common scenario ofdroughtdisasterscanbebest illustratedbythedroughtthatoccurredin2000,whenthedisasteraffected almost 50% of the country’s territory and continued 7 full months. Normally, droughtaffectsGeorgiaasadisasteronceina15-25yearperiod,butatthepresenttime,thisintervalhasseeminglybeenreducedto5-8years.
• Morethan50%ofthecountry’sterritoryislocatedundersnowslideriskzones.Atpresent,5,000snow slide spots have been identified, and threaten more than 200 populated territories.Observations over the last 40 years have shown that snow slides simultaneously affect variousregionsinthecountryonceevery7-8years.
• The entire Caucasus region is susceptible to various seismological events.Georgiais prone toearthquakesasstrongas8-9ontheRichterscale.Georgiahasexperiencedstrongearthquakesin:1988with the epicentre in Spitaki, 1991- Racha Imereti, 1992 –Pasanauri, 2002-Tbilisi, 2009-OniRegion.
2.2 GeneralCountryInformation
Capital Tbilisi
FLAG:
Description:whiterectanglewithacentralredcrossextendingtoallfoursidesoftheflag;eachofthefourquadrantsdisplaysasmallredBolnur-Katskhuricross;sometimes referred to as the Five-Cross Flag; although adopted as the officialGeorgian flag in 2004, the five-cross design appears to date back to the 14thcentury.
HeadofState PresidentGiorgiMARGVELASHVILI(since17November2013)
HeadofGovernment PrimeMinisterIrakliGARIBASHVILI(since20November2013)
16
Etymology The full, official name of the country is "Georgia", as specified in the Georgianconstitution."Georgia"isanexonym,usedintheWestsincethemedievalperiod.It is presumably derived from the Persian-Arabic designation of theGeorgians,gurğ,ğurğ,borrowedaround the timeof theFirstCrusade,ultimatelyderivedfromaMiddlePersianvarkâna,meaning"landofwolves".ThenamewasetymologizedasreferringtoSt.George,explicitlysobytheendofthe12thcenturybyJacques de Vitry, due to the Georgians' special reverence for that saint(seeTetri Giorgi). Earlymodern French historic and traveler author such asJeanChardintried to link thenameto the literalmeaningofGreekγεωργός ("tilleroftheearth;agriculturalist").
The self-designation used byethnic GeorgiansisKartvelebi(!"#$%&'&(), i.e."Kartvelians"), the native name of GeorgiaSakartvelo(*"!"#$%&'+) "land ofKartvelians" and of the Georgian languageKartuli(!"#$,')). ThemedievalGeorgian Chronicles present an eponymous ancestor of theKartvelians,Kartlos,agreat-grandsonofJapheth.
Population 4,931,226(July2015est.)
Area Total:69,700sq.km;
Geographiccoordinates
Mountain ranges and hills comprise 80% of Georgian territory. The country issituatedbetween40-47degreesEand41-44degreesN.TimezoneUTC+4
Location EasternEurope,borderingtheBlackSea,betweenTurkeyandRussia,withasliveroflandnorthoftheCaucasusextendingintoEurope
Landboundaries Total:1,839km
Bordercountries:Armenia224km,Azerbaijan446km,Russia894km,Turkey275km
Coastline 310km
Terrain Largely mountainous with Great Caucasus Mountains in the north and LesserCaucasusMountains inthesouth;Kolkhet'isDablobi(KolkhidaLowland)openstotheBlackSeainthewest;MtkvariRiverBasinintheeast;goodsoilsinrivervalleyfloodplains,foothillsofKolkhidaLowland
Landuse Arableland:5.94%;permanentcrops:1.65%;other:92.41%(2011)
GDP/Capita(PPP) $5,800(2012est.)
Membershipofinternationalorganizations
ADB,BSEC,CD,CE,NATOEAPC,EBRD,FAO,G-11,GCTU,GUAM,IAEA,IBRD,ICAO,ICC (national committees), ICRM, IDA, IFAD, IFC, IFRCS, ILO, IMF, IMO, Interpol,IOC, ICDO, IOM, IPU, ISO (correspondent), ITSO, ITU, ITUC (NGOs), MIGA, OAS(observer), OIF (observer), OPCW, OSCE, PFP, SELEC (observer), UN, UNCTAD,
17
UNESCO, UNIDO, UNWTO, UPU, WCO, WHO, WIPO, WMO, WTO, “AssociationagreementwithEU”,PFPwithNATO.
Ethnicgroups Georgian 83.8%, Azeri 6.5%, Armenian 5.7%, Russian 1.5%, other 2.5% (2002census)
Religions Orthodox Christian (official) 83.9%, Muslim 9.9%, Armenian-Gregorian 3.9%,Catholic0.8%,other0.8%,none0.7%(2002census)
Statelanguage Georgian; Georgian and Abkhaz in the territory of Autonomous Republic ofAbkhazia
Historicaloutline Geographically Georgia is divided into two parts: eastern and western, each ofwhichdevelopeditsowndistinctculture-Kolkhian(west)andIberian(east).Inthe4thcenturyB.C.KingParnavazIestablishedthefirstunitedGeorgianstate–calledKingdomofKartli.At thesameperioddevelopedandofficiallyadoptedGeorgianoriginalAlphabetwhichisuniqueoneamongworlds14Alphabet.Christianityfirstreached Georgia in the 1st century A.D. The Apostles Andrew the First called,SimontheZealotandMatthiaswerethefirsttopreachtheteachingsoftheChristhere.Inapproximately327A.DSt.NinoofCappadociacametoGeorgiainordertospreadChristianity.SheconvertedKingofGeorgia -Mirian,whothendeclared itthestatereligion.
Recenthistory GeorgiawasoneofthefirstSovietrepublicstotakestepstowardsindependence.Thisprocesswasacceleratedby theeventsof9April1989,whenSovietSoldiersbrutallycrushedapeacefulrallyinTbilisi,killing21protestors.Electionsheldon28October 1990 put an end to Soviet Georgia, so on 9 April 1991 Georgia againofficially restored independence after 70 year occupation by Soviet Union redarmyin1921.
Climate In General Warm and pleasant; Mediterranean-like on Black Sea coast - TheclimateofGeorgia isextremelydiverse,consideringthenation'ssmallsize.Therearetwomainclimaticzones,roughlyseparatingEasternandWesternpartsofthecountry. The Greater Caucasus Mountain Range plays an important role inmoderating Georgia's climate and protects the nation from the penetration ofcolderairmassesfromthenorth.TheLesserCaucasusMountainspartiallyprotecttheregionfromtheinfluenceofdryandhotairmassesfromthesouthaswell.
Naturalhazards Earthquakes,landslides,Flashfloods,hail;
Environment Airpollution,particularlyinTbilisicityareabecauseofsizeablenumberofcarsandvehicles (most of this cars/bus/vehicles/trucks are more then 10 year old)concentrated in city and their exhaust; and also in Rustavi city area because of
18
some industrial sites lack of modern air filtering equipment, also pollution ofMtkvari River basically pollution starts in Tbilisi, also pollution of the Black Sea;because of old water pipelines in many area we face inadequate high qualitysuppliesofpotablewater;insomeareassoilpollutionfromtoxicchemicals.
Nationaleconomyandgeneralinformationaboutcurrentsituation
Georgia'smaineconomicactivities includethecultivationofagriculturalproductssuch as grapes, grain, citrus fruits andhazelnuts; country is very richwith fruits:apple, nut, and chestnut. Very rich with drinking fresh waters. Mining ofManganese, Arsenic, Copper, and Gold; and output of a small industrial sectorproducing non-alcoholic and alcoholic beverages, metals, machinery, andchemicals.IthasHugehydropowercapacitythatnowprovidesmostofitsenergyneeds. Georgia has completely overcome the chronic energy shortages and gassupplyinterruptionsofthepastyearsbyrenovatingandestablishnewhydropowersmall andmedium size plants and by increasingly relying on natural gas importsfromAzerbaijan republic insteadof fromRussianFederation.Constructionof theBaku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline, the Baku-Tbilisi-Erzurum gas pipeline, and theKars-AkhalkalakiRailroadarepartofastrategytocapitalizeonGeorgia'sstrategiclocationbetweenEuropeandAsiaanddevelop its roleasa transitpoint forgas,oil, and other goods. Unemployment has also remained high at above 14%.Georgia from the period declaration of independence from Soviet Union hassuffered failure to collect tax revenues; however, the government, consideringlessons learned and best practice of EU countries, also World bankrecommendations has simplified the tax code, improved tax administration,increased tax enforcement, and cracked down on petty corruption, leading tohigher revenues. The country is pinning its hopes for renewed growth on adetermined effort to continue to liberalize the economy by reducing regulation,taxes, and corruption in order to attract foreign investment, with a focus onhydropower, agriculture, tourism, and textiles production. Last 15 years, thegovernment has taken a series of actions against endemic corruption, includingreformofthepoliceandmilitariesimplementationofafairexaminationsystemforenteringtheuniversitysystem.Thegovernmenthasreceivedhighestmarksfromthe World Bank for its anti-corruption efforts. Country government have clearstrategy of future development of democracy and still very actively continuousfight against corruption at all level, step by step liberalize business field, doeseverythingtoachievesufficienttransparencyofgovernmentworkatalldirection,doesalottoensurerealindependenceoflawcourtfrompoliticalinfluence,keepsgoodrelationswithneighbouringcountries,trytonormalizerelationswithRussianfederationandveryactivelytrytogetcloserwithEUandNATO.
19
2.3 MapofGeorgia
2.4 FormofGovernment
Systemdescription
Georgia is a Democratic republic. The Government is constituted by the PrimeMinisterandtheMinisters.ThePresidentofGeorgia is theHeadofState;Presidentrepresents Georgia in foreign relations, appoints the Government, by guaranteeingtheunityandintegrityofthecountryandisthesupremeCommanderoftheArmedForces.ThePresidentcan’tdismisstheParliament,buttheparliamenthastherighttoimpeach thePresident. InGeorgia the judiciary is administered through the justice,constitutional control and other forms established by the law.The public justice is one of the forms of administration of the judicial power. Thecommoncourtsthroughthecivil,administrativeandcriminalproceduresadministerthejustice.
The common courts of Georgia are district (city) court, court of appeals, SupremeCourtofGeorgia.Stateauthorityisexercisedbytheprincipleofseparationofpowers.Consequently,thestateisseparatedintolegislative,executiveandjudiciary.
20
2.5 NationalCivilprotectionSystem,MandateandOrganisation
Legalframework Georgia’s Law on Civil Security establishes unified emergency management system,whichinitsturnunifiesallgovernmentalandnon-governmentalorganizations,cancelssome previous regulations in civil protection field, So, according to this law they(organizations/authorities) will have more clearly and deeply defined objectives andtasks at all emergency management full cycle. Also in Georgia exists several acts,presidentialandgovernmentalresolutionsanddecreescoverscivilprotectionfiled:
LawonCivilSecurity19May2014
Governmentalresolution№68on“classificationofemergencies”;
Governmentalresolution№153on“Emergencyresponseforces”issued4June2010
Governmental resolution№154 on “Provisions for safety declaration” issued 4 June2010
Georgia’sLawonStateofEmergency(17October1997)
Georgia’sLawonProtectionofEnvironmentadoptedon22January1997
Georgia’sLawonNuclearandRadiologicalSafety(30October1998)
Civilprotection/civildefence/civilemergencyplanning:Systemoverview,organizationandstructure
Civil Protection Common system is a unity of government agencies, subordinatedinstitutionswithintheircoverage,legalentitiesofpubliclaw,organizationsengagedinfiresafetyunderthenational,autonomousrepublican,regional,municipalauthorities,whichareaimedatthepreventionandpreparednesstoemergencies,whileinthecaseof actual emergencies – response and recovery, civil safety, protection of economicinstitutionsandenvironment,reduction/decreesofmaterialdamageandlosses,alongwith the protection of citizens in emergencies resulting from hostilities, provision ofsafeandstableoperationoffacilitiescategorizedascivilsafetyinstitutions.
Thissystemensurestheimplementationofrelevantmeasureswithinthemainphases
Administrativedivisionsandstructure
9regions(mkhareebi,singular-mkhare),1city(k'alak'i),and2autonomousrepublics(avtonomiurirespublikebi,singular-avtonomiurirespublika)
Regions:Guria, Imereti, Kakheti, KvemoKartli,Mtskheta-Mtianeti,Racha-LechkhumiandKvemoSvaneti,SamegreloandZemoSvaneti,Samtskhe-Javakheti,ShidaKartli
City:Tbilisi(capital)
Autonomous republics: Abkhazia or Ap'khazet'is Avtonomiuri Respublika (Sokhumi),AjariaorAcharisAvtonomiuriRespublika(Batumi)
Note: the administrative centres of the two autonomous republics are shown inparentheses
21
ofemergencies(preventionofemergencies,preparednesstoemergencies,emergencyresponseandrecovery),organizationandmanagementofresponseforces,creationofmaterialresources.
CivilProtectionsystemateverylevelofgovernanceisbasedonGeorgia’sLawonCivilSecurity,nationalplanofpublicsafetyandotherlegalinstruments.
Emergency situations characteristic according to the their origin within Georgia’sterritorycouldbeofthefollowingtype:
• Man-made;
• Natural;
• Social;
• War.
FollowingtypesofemergenciesaredefinedinGeorgiaonthegroundsofthevolumeofresults caused by emergencies, response forces needed for their liquidation andamountofmaterialresources:
• National;
• Regional/AutonomousRepublican
• Local-municipal/city;
• Institutional/organizational/industrialsite.
EmergencySituationsOperativeManagementLevelsandCompetenceoftheEmergencyManagementAgencyofMIAofGeorgiawithSpecificAuthority
A. National (Central) Level – Emergency Management Agency under the Ministry ofInternalAffairsofGeorgia;
B. Autonomous Republic Level – Territorial Unit of the Agency in the AutonomousRepublicofAdjara;
C. RegionalLevel -TerritorialUnitsof theAgency,whichareestablished inacitywhichhoststheAdministrationoftheGovernor/StateRepresentative;
D. LocalLevel–TerritorialUnitsoftheAgency,whichareestablishedwithinthecoverageareaoftherespectivelocalauthority.
Civil Protection measures are financed from the national, autonomous republic andlocalbudgets,alongwithothersourcesoffundingpermittedinthelegislation.
EmergencyresponseandliquidationofconsequencesarefinancedinlinewiththerulesdefinedbytheGovernmentofGeorgia.
AuthorityofNational
AuthorityoftheexecutivegovernmentofGeorgia intheareaofprotectionofcitizensand land in emergencies within the scope of competence defined in the National
22
GovernmentAgencies
EmergencyResponsePlanforCivilsafetyandotherregulationsshallbethefollowing:
• Notificationofgeneralpublicaboutemergenciesarisinginpeaceorhostilitiesandprovisionofinformationonessentialactionsoftheircivilsafety;
• Evacuationofcitizensandallocationand/orarrangementofshelterstothem;
• Organizationofprotectionmeasuresofcitizensagainstengineering,chemical,radiation,medical,biology,fireandpsychologyweaponsinemergenciesandinlinewiththeNationalResponsePlan;
• Provisionofaccommodationorgoodsofprimaryconsumption,essentialstockoffoodandwatertocitizensinemergencies;
• Executionofemergencyrescueandrecoveryactivitiesintheemergencyzone,provision of civil safety, restoration of utilities operation andmaintenance ofsustainableoperationoffacilitiescategorizedundercivilsafety;
• Organizationofburials for thedeceasedcitizens incasesofmassive lossesoflifecausedbyemergenciesarisinginpeaceorhostilities;
• Timelyidentificationofemergencyrisksandtheirprevention;implementationof targeted scientific-technical programs for the stable operation of facilitiescategorizedundercivilsafetyinemergenciesandhostilities;
• Development of a Common National Policy by passing regulations within itscompetencewiththispurposeandsupervisionoftheirexecution;organizationofcivilsafetyinlinewiththecommonplan;
• Organization of the territory into groups of cities and organizations intocategories;
• Developmentofmilitaryandpubliccooperationplans;
• Definitionofrulesfortheinteractionoftheauthorityofexecutivegovernmentof Georgia and its local authorities for the classification of emergencies,includingthoseresultingfromforestfires,alsoforemergencyresponse;
• Establishmentofstructuraldivisionsintheareaofemergencymanagement;
• Planning of organizational, engineering and technical measures designed forthesustainableoperationofthesectorinactualorpotentialemergenciesandhostilities;
• Development of legally binding norms and rules for the safe operation offacilitiescategorizedundercivilsafetyinlinewiththelegislationofGeorgia;
• Development and implementation of emergency prevention measures and
23
emergencyriskmanagementplan;
• Organization of scientific-research, pilot and development, test and designactivities;
• Organizationofcivilsafetytests;
• Establishment of emergency units for actual or potential emergencies andprovisionoftheiroperation;
• Mobilizationofmaterialreserves;
• Development of an institutional plans of emergency management and theirapprovalbythemanageroftheinstitutionafteritsagreementwiththeAgency;
• Organizationofajointexecutionofmeasuresinlinewiththerulesofmilitaryandpubliccooperationwithagenciesofspecialauthorityandresponseforces;
• Provision of the preparedness of management bodies for the prevention ofemergencies, preparedness of response forces and creation of materialresources;
• Initial and repeated training of response forces in the prevention andemergency response; training of national and local authorities, organizations,dulyauthorizedofficialsat facilities categorizedunder civil safetyandcitizenswithcurriculumagreedwiththeAgency;
• Provision of support to the victims of emergencies and organization ofhumanitarianandsocialprotectionmeasures;
• Definetheprovisionofmeasuresofinternationalcooperationandhostcountrysupport;
• Protectionofhumanlifeandprovisionoftheirsafetyoffshore.
FollowingbelongtotheauthorityoftheexecutivegovernmentagenciesofGeorgia inthe area of fire safety and within the competence defined in the legislation of thecountry:
• Developmentand implementationofanationalpolicy, issuanceofregulationsandcontrolovertheirexecution;
• Development of targeted programs, organization and funding of theirexecution;
• Development of technical regulations, norms, rules and other by-laws on firesafety, including the rules of fire fighting and emergency rescue in accidents,alongwiththeregulationsfororganizations;
24
• Developmentoftheexpenditurepartofthestatebudgetfortheexecutionoffiresafetymeasuresandtargeteduseofbudgetallocations;
• Establishment,reorganizationandliquidationoffireprotectionunitsandtheirmanagementorganizations;
• Organizationandimplementationofnationalfiresupervision;
• Provision of public information; establishment of statistical records-keepingsystemsonfiresandtheirconsequences;
• Definitionofcommonprinciplesofcomplianceintheareaoffiresafety;
• Implementation of legal and social protection measures for the staff of thenationalfirefightingservicesandtheirfamilymembers;
• Organizationof institutional fire surveillance at organizations subordinated toexecutivegovernmentifrequired;
• Developmentofalistofparticularlysignificant,potentiallyhazardous,nationaltreasureandculturalheritagesitesapprovedwithaGovernmentDecree,whichessentiallyneedtohavefireprotection.
ExecutivegovernmentagenciesofGeorgiaareresponsibleforthefollowingintheareaoffiresafetyandwithintheirrespectivecompetencies:
• Ensure the adherence to the fire safety requirements at their subordinatedorganizationsandwithintheirrespectiveterritories;
• Establish conditions for the engagement of citizens in the activities of fireprophylacticsandfirefighting;
• Organize the fire safety campaign and training of citizens in the rules of firesafety;
• Ensuretheforestfireprophylactics;
• Ensuretheorganizationoffirefightingandemergencyrescueinaccidents.
Authorised officials of the executive government agencies of Georgia providemethodologyguidancetolegalentitiesofthesectorinemergenciesfortheprotectionoftheirstaffandonissuesofsafeoperationofenterprises.
ManagersoftheexecutivegovernmentagenciesofGeorgiaarekeptresponsibleunderthe legislation of Georgia on the adherence of their subordinates to their assignedfunctionsintheareaofcivilsafetyinlinewiththelegislationofGeorgia.
Executive government agencies of Georgia collect, process and communicate/shareinformation in the area of public safety, along with other functions defined in the
25
legislationofGeorgia.
Relevant agencies of the executive government enforce control over the fire safety,prevention of emergencies and adherence to emergency response in line with thelegislation of Georgia in forests, mining and underground sites, production, ofexplosives for industrial purposes, their transportation, storage, use, processing anddisposal,alongwiththeair,marineandrailtransportationmeans,operationoffloatingmarinemeansandconstructions.
Authorityofagenciessupervisingthenational fireandcivilsafety,alongwithnationalfirefightingserviceshallberegulatedatthesitesoftheMinistryofDefenceofGeorgiaonthegroundsofajointOrderoftheMinistersofDefenceandInteriorofGeorgia.
26
(DiagramwiththeOrganizationofchainsofcommandduringdisasterreliefoperationsofGeorgiaevenhereishowcountryapplyrequestforinternationalAssistanceincaseofNationallevelEmergencies)
Earlywarningandcommunication
How it is defined in Georgia: “Notification/early warnings of Emergencies toGeneral Public – provision of messages and immediate information by theemergency responsemanagement bodies to the national and local authorities,organizations and citizens on the threats of the emergency situations and/ordevelopmentofemergencies”.
Country have centralized early warning system, considering circumstances thattherearepreliminarilydefinedhazardorriskmonitoringbodieswhoaresharingurgent/warninginformationintimebetweenallministries,Governorsofficesandmunicipal services, so take into account above mentioned information this
AvailableHumanandMaterialResources
27
centralizedearlywarningsystemworksquitenormallybutalsocountryfaceslackoftechnicalparametersinthisregardandneedsmoreforfurtherimprovement.
2.6 OperativeInformation
Emergencynumbers(police,ambulance,fire,etc.)
112
2.7 Agreements
Bilateral/multilateralagreements
Agreement between the Government of the republic of Azerbaijan and theGovernment of Georgia on cooperation in the area of prevention,mitigationand elimination of consequences caused by natural andman-made disasters(17September1997)
Agreement between the Government of the republic of Armenia and theGovernment of Georgia on cooperation in the area of prevention,mitigationandeliminationofconsequencescausedbynaturalandman-madedisasters(3May1997)
Agreement between the Government of the republic of Kazakhstan and theGovernmentofGeorgiaoncooperationintheareaofemergencymanagement(18January2002)
Agreement between the Government of the republic of Ukraine and theGovernmentofGeorgiaoncooperationintheareaofemergencymanagement(17August1999)
Agreement between the Governments who are members of the “Black SeaEconomic Cooperation” (BSEC) about cooperation in the area of emergencymanagementfield(signedon15April1998,inforceafter29September2004)
Agreement between the black sea coast countries about cooperation in theareaofsearchandrescueactivitiesonthesea(ratifiedbyGeorgia’sParliamentin2009)
AgreementbetweentheGovernmentswhoaremembersoftheGUUAMaboutcooperationintheareaofemergencymanagementfield(signedin3July2003andratifiedbyGeorgia’sParliamenton26October2004)
Agreement between the Government of the republic of Lithuania and theGovernment of Georgia on cooperation in the area of prevention,mitigationand elimination of consequences caused by natural andman-made disasters
28
(26September2013)
Agreement between the Government of the Russian Federation and theGovernment of Georgia on cooperation in the area of prevention,mitigationandeliminationofconsequencescausedbynaturalandman-madedisasters(3February1994)
Agreement between the Government of the Jordan Hashemite Kingdom andthe Government of Georgia on cooperation in the area of prevention,mitigationandeliminationofconsequencescausedbynaturalandman-madedisasters(15December2011)
Agreement between the Government of the republic of Belarus and theGovernment of Georgia on cooperation in the area of prevention,mitigationand elimination of consequences caused by natural andman-made disasters(11March2014)
MemorandumofunderstandingbetweenoftheMinistryof InternalAffairsofGeorgia and the Ministry of home front defence of the state of Israelconcerningbilateral cooperationon the fieldof emergencymanagement andcivilprotection(signed8May2013)
P.S.AlsoEmergencyManagementAgencyofMIAcooperatesverycloselyandflowingly has several memorandums with different authorities inside thecountry as well with different NGOs and International organization in thefieldofcivilprotection/emergencymanagement.
2.8 InternationalAssistance
Nationalarrangementsonhowtoreceiveanddeliverinternationalassistance
Entryintotheterritorybyroad
Roadtransportofrelief/internationalteams:
NamesofSpecializedbordercrossingpointsgivespossibilityforvehiclesentry:
1)KAZBEGIcheckpoint–locatedNorth-eastpartofGeorgia
2)REDBRIDGE–locatedsouth-eastpartofGeorgia;
3)SADAKHLO–locatedsouth-eastpartofGeorgia;
4)NINOTSMINDAcheckpoint–locatedsouth-centralpartofGeorgia
5)VALEcheckpoint–locatedsouth-centralpartofGeorgia;
6)SARPIcheckpointlocatedsouthwestpartofGeorgia.
Animalhealthrestrictions(e.g.Searchandrescuedogs):Usuallysearchandrescue dogs should have International passports and vaccinationdocumentstoprovideveterinaryunitatbordercrossingpoint.
29
ProvidingVisaat thebordercrossingpoint for reliefpersonnel:Ministry ofInternalAffairsprovidestoissueVisasattheborder,incaseofanytroubleMinistryofForeignaffairscanbeinvolvedtofacilitatevisaobtainprocess.
Circulationintheterritory
Daylightdrivingrestrictions:N/A
Nightdrivingrestrictions:N/A
Weekenddrivingbans:Noanyspecialweekenddrivingbans
Season driving bans:N/A – Note: In winter Season some driving restrictionsometimeyoucanfaceespeciallyontheroadconnectsGeorgiawithRussianfederation
Road/motorwaytolls:Noanymotorwaytolls
Restrictionsas regardsalcohol consumptionwhiledriving: InGeneralNo anymilligramofAlcoholispermittedduringdriving.
Convoy attendance: Ministry of Internal Affairs provide convoyinginternational rescueteamsandhumanitariangoods fromborder toplaceofdestination.
Facilitationofroadtransportoperations
Civil Protection Contact Point: Emergency Management Agency under theMinistryofInternalAffairsofGeorgia,0114,TbilisiG.Guluastreet№10
Competent authority concerning request escorts for civil protection convoys:MinistryofInternalAffairsofGeorgia
Competent authority concerning request for exceptions for urgent reliefoperations: EmergencyManagement Agency under theMinistry of InternalAffairs of Georgia, but if international relief assistance comes then needpoliticaldecision
Entryintotheterritorybyair
International airports (e.g. availability/operational program, capacity/take-offandlandinglanelength,taxesforparkingandhandlingservices,availabilityofresourcesforrefuelling):TbilisiInternationalAirport
Animal health restrictions (e.g. Search and rescue dogs): search and rescuedogs should have International passports and vaccination documents toprovideveterinaryunitatbordercrossingpoint.
ProvidingVisa at the airport for relief personnel:Ministry of Internal Affairsprovidestoissuevisasattheborder
FacilitationofCustomsprocedures
Exempt relief goods and equipment’s fromall customduties, taxes, tariffs orany governmental fees:based onMemorandum of Understanding betweenNATO and Georgia all relief goods and equipment do not need to pay anycustomsfees.
30
Availability of customs outside of business hours: Custom services areavailablealwaysduringpeacetimeaswellduringemergencies24/7
Regulationsandotherparticularissuesaffectingtheliabilityofreliefpersonnel
Recognitionofrelevantprofessionalqualifications of reliefpersonnel (medicalpersonnel, rescuers,engineers, etc.) duringthe internationalassistanceoperation
Yes – in case of huge scale disaster when international rescue teams arecoming inside the country Georgia officially recognizes rescuers of relevantprofessional qualifications of relief personnel (medical personnel, rescuers,engineers,etc.)
Recognition of allnecessary certificatesand qualificationsneededfortheconductof their work, such asdriver’slicense
Yes-recognizesforeigncountriesrelevant/suchdocumentations.
Any liability forphysicalinjury,adversehealth effects or deathof any person /property damage onyour territoryproduced with nointention by the reliefpersonnel of theSending Nation duringthe relief operations,shallbeassumedby:
IncaseofnationallevelemergencieswheneverGeorgiarequestsInternationalassistanceand flowingly such teamsarearrive in (medical, searchand rescueetc.) to conduct relevant activities – in case of any mistake that can causedeathof injuredpersonduringassistingtimeor ifbecauseofrescuermistakedamaged building will be collapsed he/she will not be judged by Georgia’slegislation,sonoanyliabilityforphysicalinjury,adversehealtheffectsordeathofanyperson/propertydamage,but incaseofcriminalwhenlawswillworkasitisusualforeverybody.
RegulationsandotherparticularissuesregardingtheHostNationSupport
Conceptimplementedintotherelevantnationallegislationinforce
StillGeorgiadidnotimplementedEUHostNationSupportconceptinlegislationbutmostprobablycountrywillhavesuchHNSconceptbeforetheendof2014year.
Legislativebasis:Georgia’sLawonCivilSecurityconsidersurgentrequirementorletsayobligationtopreparewithinthe2014year“normativeAct”whichwill
31
beapprovedbyGovernmentandwhereshouldbeclearlydescribedaboutHostNationSupportconcept–proceduresindetail.
Consistinprovidingsupporttotheinternationalreliefpersonnelwiththefollowings:
Entry (Does country provide visa issue facilitation, waiver of taxation on roads,provisionofescort,security,clearingoftheroads,etc.)?
Answer:Yes
Please provide a brief description of the procedure in place: Based onmemorandum of understanding “on the facilitation of vital civil bordertransport”all kindof reliefandhumanitariangoodsare freeof charge fromcustoms.
Communication (providingtotheinternationalreliefteamsinduetimethenecessaryaccesstofrequencies,bandwidthandsatelliteuse)
Answer:Yescountrywillprovide in timeallnecessaryaccess to frequencies,bandwidthandsatelliteuse.
CommandandControl (Areliaisonofficersdesignatedforcooperationwiththeincominginternationalteams)
Answer:Yes
Coordination (exists or not procedures for other relevant Ministries involvement in reliefreception operations, such as Telecommunication, Transport, Health, PoliceServices,etc.)
Answer:Yes
Security (Exist ornot appropriatemeasures inplace to keep safe the relief personnel,locations,goodsandequipmentrelatedtotheinternationalassistance)
Answer:Yes
Language (Provisionofinterpretersfortheinternationalteams)
Answer: In legislation still does not exist any specific information about thetranslatorsforincomingInt.teams–but,anywaygenerallyspeakitdependsofnumberofint.teamsnumber.
Pleaseprovideabriefdescriptionoftheprocedureinplace:interpreterswillbeinvolved to provide translation for international teams and for all points:LEMA,OSOCC,Internationalrescueteams.
2.9 ListofRelevantContacts
CivilProtectionbody:
EmergencyManagement
Postaladdress:0114;Tbilisi;Georgia
32
Agency of MIA ofGeorgia
Telephonenumber:(+99532)2411724
Faxnumber:(+99532)2752161
E-mailaddress:cepgeorgia@mia.gov.ge
PersonofContact:MrZviadKatsashvili–DirectorofAgency
Emergency/operational Postaladdress:0114Tbilisi,Georgia
Tel.dutyofficersworking24/7: (+995)322746220; (+995)322411861;(+995)577556201
Faxnumber:(+99532)2752161;(+995)322752085
E-mailaddress:cepgeorgia@mia.gov.ge
Internationalcooperation
Postaladdress:0114Tbilisi,Georgia
Telephonenumber:(+995)322411806
Mob:+995577108510
Faxnumber:(+99532)2752161
OfficeE-mail:cepgeorgia@mia.gov.ge
Personal:sh_akhvlediani@hotmail.com
Person of Contact: Mr Shalva Akhvlediani – Deputy Head of Humanitarianaffairsandcivil-militarycooperationunitofCivilProtectionDivisionofMIAofGeorgia
Internationalassistance Postaladdress:0114Tbilisi,Georgia
Telephonenumber:(+995)322411806
Mob:+995577108510
Faxnumber:(+99532)2752161
E-mailaddress:cepgeorgia@mia.gov.ge
Personal:sh_akhvlediani@hotmail.com
Person of Contact: Mr Shalva Akhvlediani – Deputy Head of Humanitarianaffairsandcivil-militarycooperationunitofCivilProtectionDivisionofEMDofMIAofGeorgia
USEFULWEBPAGESABOUTGEORGIA:
1) http://www.supremecourt.ge/
2) http://government.gov.ge/index.php?lang_id=ENG
3) http://www.parliament.ge/ge/
4) https://www.president.gov.ge/
33
Responder:
PPRDEastNationalCoordinatorinGEORGIA-MrOtarKereselidze,HeadoftheSection,EmergencyManagementAgencyoftheMinistryofInternalAffairs+995322413806+995577920497cepgeorgia@mia.gov.ge
34
3 Progress made in the adoption of recommendations provided within thePPRDEastProgrammePhase1
KeyAssessorsPPRDEast2Expert DavideMiozzoCountryThematicFocalPoint N/AChaptervalidatedby CountryAdvisoryGroup
3.1 Legalframework
PPRDEAST1recommendations Actiontaken
Georgia shouldbemoreactive inenhancing theapproximation to the acquis communautairesupporting what has been already developedwithinthePPRDEastProgramme.
Over the last years Georgia has worked in order touptake PPRD East Programme recommendationsfavouring the approximation of the acquiscommunitaire. This was favoured by a strongcollaboration with the EU (twinning and PPRD EastProgrammes) leading to the signature of the EU-Georgia Association Agreement in June 2014. Keyelements of this Agreement include enhancedcooperationin28keysectorpolicyareasincludingtheCivil Protection (Chapter 22 of the Agreement). ThusGeorgian institutions have been conducting exchangeofbestpracticesandguidelines in the fieldofdisasterprevention,preparednessandresponsewithEuropeannationalcivilprotectionagencies.
This strong cooperation has facilitated the process ofrevisionoftheGeorgianCPsystem.
Inaddition, it alsomustbenoted that theMinistryofEnvironment and Natural Resources Protection,through its DRR Office, has initiated a series ofconsultationswithEUMemberStatesexpertstoassessthe gaps in the Georgian legislation in order to reachthe approximation that resulted in the drafting of aRoadMapfortheapproximationtotheEUFD.
35
Moreclarificationofcommandandcontrolchainamongst different stakeholders within the CPsystemaccordinglytorecentamendmentsoftheInstitutionalfunctioningofthesystem.
WiththeadoptionofLawonCivilSecurityNo2467-IIсof 29May 2014, the former EmergencyManagementDepartment(undertheMinistryofInternalAffairs)hasbecome a more independent and agile Agency(Emergency Management Agency). This allowed theAgency to establish a better command and controlchain basing it on the National Emergency Planadopted with Presidential Decree n.415 of 26 August2008 which is currently being updated taking intoconsideration the he Sendai Framework for DisasterRiskReduction.
Strengthening the communication amongststakeholdersindisastermanagementandDRR.
As above-mentioned, the restructuring of the entirecivil protection system has favoured communicationamongst stakeholders. Bulletins are shared amidstrelevantstakeholdersandingeneraltheearlywarningsystem is being strengthened (see institutionalrecommendation#6).
InthelastyearsDIPECHOhasinvestedalotofeffortsinmaking sure that sure disaster risk reduction anddisaster management became an integral part of theofficialschoolcurriculum,thuswidespreadconceptsofthe Georgian society. Great collaboration in this fieldhasbeenprovidedbytheMinistryofEducation.
However it must be noted that communication flowaiming at the diffusion of operative information andtriggering the activation of emergency procedures(especially from centre to periphery) needs to bestrengthened.Cleardemonstrationofthishasbeentheinteresting discussions amongst the differentstakeholders initiated after the June 2015 floods inTbilisi.
Early warning and prevention strategies to beintroduced in the National Response Plan at alllevels.
ThenewNationalPublicSafetyplanhasbeenadoptedwith Resolution No 508 of 24 September 2015. Theresolution consolidates the legal and institutionalchanges donebyGeorgia creating a unified systemof
36
emergencymanagement,whichregulatestheactivitiesof all the stakeholders involved in civil security(including CP). The newly adopted plan both definestheroleandresponsibilitiesofprincipalandsubsidiaryforces and it creates a general framework for theimplementationofprevention,preparedness,responseandrecoveryinemergencysituations1.
Strengthening the communication strategiesamidst civil protection authorities andpopulation.
See the above stated actions taken related to legalrecommendations#1-4.
Adoption of strategies for the enforcement ofprivatesectorandlocalmunicipalitiesemergencyplanning.
Local emergency plans are still a weakness of theGeorgian civil protection system. In addition, lowcompetence of local CP actors does not favour theadoptionofsystembuildingpoliciesinthesefields.
Nevertheless there are a number of pilot projects,which are dealing with the improvement of theemergency management system at local level. Thoseshould be monitored and their outcomes studied toidentify potential best practices worth replicating atNationallevel2.
Adoption of volunteerism strategies aiming atdeveloping standardized procedures for expertand volunteers selection, recruitment anddeployment.
VolunteersareawidespreadrealityinGeorgiaandareactively used and deployed in emergency times byEMA. EMA trains and equips (where possible)volunteers. Legally, the concept of volunteerism hasbeen introduced into Law on Civil Security (2014)however it still needs to be elaborated and preciseindications need to be provided for the selection,recruitment,traininganddeploymentofvolunteers.
1ResolutionNo508ofSeptember24th,2015:https://matsne.gov.ge/ka/document/view/29939182Interestinginitiativesthatareworthmentioning:theGeorgianRedCrosshasimplementedanEUsupportedproject“Buildingresilient local communities in Georgia and Armenia”: http://adore.ifrc.org/Download.aspx?FileId=80015; The Ministry of
EnvironmentandNaturalResourcesProtectionofGeorgiaisimplementingaUNDPprojectonClimateResilientFloodandFlash
FloodManagementintheRioniriverwhichhasasaimthedevelopmentofpoliciespromotingresiliencetofloodandflashflood
risk:http://www.ge.undp.org/content/georgia/en/home/operations/projects/environment_and_energy/floods.html
37
A general Law on Volunteerism (not specific for civilprotection activities) is currently being discussed andrevisedintheParliament.
3.2 Institutionalframework
PPRDEAST1recommendations Actiontaken
Because of the highly cross-sectoral nature of CPactions,especiallywhentheyareconsideredwithinthe full DRR cycle, that involve several Ministriesand respective resources, central and localgovernmental authorities, private companies andvolunteers organizations, a clear role of thecoordinatingauthorityshallbedefined.Despitetheextensive experience of EMD in coordinating CPactivities,duetodifficultiesandcomplexityofsuchrole, itwould be recommendable to empower andreinforcetheEMDcapacityascoordinationbody,inthe full respect of responsibilities and roles of thedifferentactors.
As above-mentioned, the adoption of Law on CivilSecurity of 29May 2014 granted EMD (now EMA)thesecoordinationpowers.
It is indeed that EMD should be more intensivelyand extensively involved in the whole DM cycleincludingpreventionandmitigationgiventhestrongcoordinationrolethatEMDexertsintheCPareaatalllevels.
LawonCivilSecurityof29May2014 introducedasduties of EMA (art. 5) prevention and mitigationactionstobecarriedalsoinpeacetime.
Mechanisms of coordination amongMinistries andNGOs (Crisis Management Inter-Agency OperativeCentre) and with the scientific world (the EMDExpert Advisory Council) exist. Mandate of CrisisManagement Inter-Agency Operative Centre ishowever focused mainly on the emergencyresponsephase,butalthoughthisCentrecarriesoutactivities regarding prevention and mitigation. The
The Expert-Advisory Council, hosted by EMA, hasachieved preliminary institutional commitment.Nevertheless,Georgiastilldoesnothavetheofficialrecognition by UNISDR of a National Platform forDRR.
38
ExpertAdvisoryCouncilformulatesproposalsonlyinthefieldofpreventionandmitigation.Theexistenceof suchCouncil and the experienceof EMD in thatrelation,representvaluableassetstobuilduponfortheestablishmentofaNationalPlatformforDRRasper UNISDR requirement, thus identifying in thecountryembryosof sucha structure.However, theNPforDRRshouldhavetheendorsementfromtheCabinet ofMinisters and should bewider in scopeincluding essential parts of DRR (e.g., urbanplanning,riskfinancingandinvestment,sustainabledevelopment, climate change adaptation) to lobbyforcomprehensiveDRRstrategies in thecountryatall levels. The NP should specifically focus ondefining policies for data availability and sharingamong non-institutional and institutionalstakeholders.
Introducing the “lesson learned” concept by thesystematic incorporation of risk reductionapproaches into the design and implementation ofemergency preparedness, response and recoveryprogrammes in the reconstruction of affectedcommunities.
The revision of the National DRR Strategy and itsActionPlanseesasmainpriority theestablishmentof a multi-hazard disaster risk information andknowledgesystem. Itwillnot tacklespecifically theissue of “lessons learned” but itwill allow to keeptrackofhistoricaleventsandunderstandtheriskstowhich the territory is exposed. At the same timesuch a data gathering system will provide thematerial for the development of multi-hazard riskprofiles that are the basis of any preparedness,responseandrecoveryprogramme.
Improvement of the awareness and clarification ofresponsibilitiesinlocalcommunitiesisconsideredapriorityforthecorrectfunctioningoftheCPsystemincludingreflectioninthepreventionandmitigationphases. More generally, concerning publicawareness, communication policies should addressalsopreventionmeasuresandsusceptibility to risk.Populationintheareasofhighvulnerability(livingin
LawonCivilSecurityof29May2014addressestheissue of clarifying responsibilities of local dutyholders and of increase of public awareness bydifferent means (mainly media or Institutionalchannels).Ontheotherhand,itdoesnotcoverthepossibilityofdevelopingawarenesscampaignsusingactive participation of volunteers, which is a veryefficientmethodforraisingawarenessatgrass-root
39
thefloodcatchmentareas, inearthquake, landslideand avalanche prone zones) has to be speciallyaddressed in public awareness campaigns. Anationalcoordinationofall thecommunicationandraisingawarenessactivitiesshouldbepromoted.
level.
Thecoordinationbetweencentraland local level isworkingpoorlyduring thepreparednessphaseduetothescarceawarenessofthelocalauthoritiesandto the limited tools at hand of the central level toinfluence appropriate standards at local level. Aproper clarification of responsibilities at local levelin junctionwithpropersupervisionpowers toEMDcould improve efficiency of the entire CP system.Thisisespeciallytruewhensearchandrescueteamsand fire brigades are of concern. In this wakespecifictrainingprogramsfordisastermanagersandother relevant people at local level to understandand use the risk assessment methodology in dailywork should be developed. With more specificreferencetocertainstructuressuchasfirebrigades,it should be explored the possibility of a strongercentralization, for example under the coordinationof EMD, to guarantee homogeneity of equipmentand training, aswell as improving the coordinationandefficiencyduringemergencyresponse.
TheMinistryofEnvironmentandNaturalResourcesProtection with the help of the NationalEnvironment Agency are currently implementingearly warning strategies. Forecasts and dailybulletins are shared with ministries, municipalitiesandarediffusedthroughthemassmedia.Thesearecoupled with an automatic monitoring system,which is being currently strengthened.Dissemination appears to be sufficient atinstitutional level, nevertheless the lack of trainingandplanning and the continuous exchangeof dutyholdersat local levelposesagreatchallenge inthecorrectfunctioningoftheearlywarningsystem.
Moreover,with the restructuringof theEMAtherehas been a strong centralisation of powers,including the Fire Brigades. With the Law on CivilSecurityinplace,resourceshavebeenbettersharedand distributed providing equipment and trainingacross the country that have highly increased theefficiencyoftheentiresystem.
Involve the community with a bottom – upapproach, inorderto improveandexploit the localknowledgeoftheareasandoftheoccurringevents.In this respect, local authorities at local (saymunicipal) level seem to be the perfect actors inDM. This is particularly important when localemergency plans are not mandatory by the Law.Thiscanbeachievedthrough:
• Investingfurtherinasubsidiaryapproach,inwhich the national level can substitute the
Communities are being more involved in the newunified civil protection system. Howevermuch hastobedone in this respect as themain criticality inGeorgia still lays in the connection betweenpopulationandinstitutions.
Nevertheless,EMAhasgoodrelationshipwithNGOsthat operate in Georgia. With their support,participatory emergency planning at local level isbeing promoted. Unfortunately the reducedavailabilityoffundslimitstheimpactwithinproject
40
local levelwhenthe latter isnotcapabletocope with specific situations. Such aprinciple is fundamental at the EU, and itseems to be already taken into account intheGeorgianDMsystem.
• Implement a bottom-up approach for thedefinition of the criticalities of the DMsystem,tobeaddressedbyspecifictrainingmodules.
• Improve suitable budget allocation for DMactivitiesatalllevels.
• Implement sound emergency plans at alllevels including all the phases of the DMcyclewithparticularattentiontopreventionand preparedness with involvement of allstakeholders.
areas not enabling them to be replicatedcountrywide.
Concerning the Early Warning System, the linkbetween monitoring activities and EWS should beimproved, with reference to information for boththeCPtechniciansandthepublicatrisk.Withinthisframework, the system of information sharing andstandard operational procedures between Georgiaand neighbouring countries must be developed,focusingonallthetemporalphasesofDRR,butwithspecialfocusonreal-timeandnearreal-timeissues.
The National Environmental Agency has a veryimportant role in this respect. It has increased thenumber of monitoring activities. The GeologicalDepartmenthasthemandatetomonitorgeologicalhazards(DecreeoftheMinistryofEnvironmentandNaturalResourcesProtection,nr.27,10May2013)while the Hydrogeology Department has themandate tomonitor hydro-meteorological hazards.TheMinistryofEnvironmentandNaturalResourcesProtection itself has the obligation of developingand managing the entire multi hazard monitoringsystem (Law on Environment of 1996, art. 27).Recently an SMS alerting system has beenintroducedandtestedwithgoodresults.
Moreover, the National Crisis Management Centreis currently instituting a centralized monitoringcentre (built following European best practices),wherealltheinformationwillbeconveyedinordertograntquickerresponseandcirculationofdata.
41
In relation to cross boarder relations, two goodpracticeshavetobeacknowledged:
• On 1 August 2013 Georgia and Azerbaijanhave signed the Agreement on EmergencyResponse. The Agreement sets the framefor bilateral relations in the fields ofprevention, preparedness and emergencyresponse.
• TheEarthScienceInstituteandtheInstituteof Geophysics of Ilia University provides avery valuable monitoring system keepinginformed in real time all nationalstakeholders (although no Law orgovernmentaldecisionestablishestheirrolein the CP system). Moreover, it hasestablishedverystrongconnectionswithitscounterpartsinneighbouringcountries.
3.3 Conclusion
ThePPRDEastPhase1andTwinningProgrammeshelpedGeorgia in itstransitionfromaresponsivetoamore organized and structured civil protection system. It is important to emphasise the fact that theGeorgian Government has decided to follow EU best practices activating institutional channels. Thisfavoured the creationof a cooperation frameworkwithinwhich it has beenpossible to identify suitableinterventionsthatneededtobeimplemented.
Theinstitutionalandlegalreformsthatarecurrentlytakingplaceneedtimetosettleandwillshowresultsintheshort/mediumterm.Fromthisperspective,inthenextyearsempoweringthefollowingmainissueswillberelevant:
• Constantlymonitortheon-goingreformsoftheCivilProtectionSystem;
• Strengthen the communication flow amongst civil protection/disaster risk managementstakeholdersbyfinalizingthecreationofacentralizedmonitoringsystem;
• Promote the adoption of emergency plans at local level favouring participatory approachesinvolvingthepopulation;
42
• Promote the institutionalizationofaNationalCivilProtectionVolunteeringSystembyadoptingasoundlegalframeworkandSOPswhichclearlyidentifyroles,duties,areasofintervention,trainingprotocols,deploymentandrightsofCPVolunteers;and
• Empower and institutionalize the National Platform for DRR and use it as privileged discussionforumforthedevelopmentoflong-termstrategies.
43
4 FloodRiskManagementandapproximationtotheEUFloodsDirective
KeyAssessorsPPRDEast2Expert RobertoRudari
CountryThematicFocalPoint NikolozKuchaidzeChaptervalidatedby NikolozKuchaidze
CountryAdvisoryGroup
4.1 Legalandinstitutionalframework
Georgia has not yet officially transposed EU FloodsDirective (EUFD) in its national legal framework, butstarted a series of preparatory actions in order to approximate to the EUFD. Georgia signed the EU –Georgia Association Agreement and Association Agenda, which aim to promote the dialogue andapproximationofEUlegislationonitemssuchascivilprotectionandfloodsmanagement,thisagreementhas the EUFD amongst its priority. Within such framework the Ministry of Environment and NaturalResourcesProtection (MENRP) through itsDRRoffice initiatedaseriesofconsultationswithEUMemberStates experts to assess the gaps in the Georgian legislation in order to reach the approximation thatresultedinthedraftingofaRoadMapfortheapproximationtotheEUFD.GeorgialegislationisundergoingdeepchangesallpossiblyconnectedwiththeEUFD.Mentioningthemostrelevantones:theLawonCivilSecurityentered inforce in2014thatforeseesenhancedmandatesforthenewlyconstitutedEmergencyManagement Agency (EMA) within the Ministry of Internal Affairs many of which related to flood riskassessmentandfloodriskmanagement.InparticularEMAisnowintheprocessofdefiningsub-legislationthatincludescontentofDisasterEmergencyManagementPlans(DEMP)includingfloods.Dependingonthedecisiontakenindraftingsuchsub-legislationDEMPcancoverasubstantialpartofthecontentsincludedinaFloodRiskManagementPlan(FRMP)thatisthefinalgoaloftheEUFD.
ThenewlycratedStateSecurityandCrisisManagementCouncil(SSCMC)underthePrimeMinisterOfficeisanother key player for the EUFD. The SSCMC is in the process of drafting and getting approved both aNational DRR Strategy and a DRR Action Plan that will include the approximation to the EUFD. Suchdocumentsshouldbefinalizedandadoptedbytheendofthe2015.
Georgia isalsoabouttoadoptanewWaterCodedevelopedbytheMinistryofEnvironmentandNaturalResourcesProtection(MENRP)thatincludesimportantlinkswiththeWaterFrameworkDirective(WFD)aswellaswithEUFD.InthespecificthiscouldhelpinthedefinitionofUnitsofManagementthatcouldserveboth the WFD and the EUFD implementation. There are no basin management districts identified andmanagedinGeorgiasofarandthisshouldbeoneofthefocusesofthenewWaterCode.SuchCodeis inlinewiththeNationalEnvironmentalActionProgrammeofGeorgia(2012–2016)developedbythesameMinistry,whichhasadedicatedsectionondisastersincludingtheonesrelatedtofloods.
44
Allthesepiecesoflegislationaimatanincreasingfloodprotectionlevel,thisintentionisalsorepresentedin the annually updated Mid-Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) for 2013-2016 where disasterpreventionisoneoftheprioritiesintheEnvironmentSector.
The Ministry of Economy and Sustainable Development is also in the process of drafting a NationalSustainableDevelopmentPlan(NSDP)thathasenvironmentalissuesandriskderivedfromnaturalhazardsintegratedinit.
However, despite the favourable legislative setup all these Laws, strategies and plans lack in inter-institutionalcoordinationandthisleadssometimestoanunclearorconflictingrolesandmandatesofthedifferent institutional actors. This leads to difficulties in finding a mandated institution or body for thedevelopmentofacoordinatedFloodManagementPlan(FMP)thathasthenaturalcatchmentasatargetareaanddomain.
Common practice however exists in support of the actions requested by the EUFD that stems fromdifferentpiecesoflegislationorsub-legislationsometimesinternaltoasingleMinistryorinstitution.HereapracticalexampleofFloodHazardMapsandFloodRiskMapsupdateistakentoillustratethecurrentstatus.
Hazard Mapping in case of Flooding is recognised to be a responsibility of the National EnvironmentalAgency (NEA) of the MENRP across all institutions. This helped by the fact that NEA has the technicalcapacitytodevelopsuchinformationinternallyorinconnectiontoadhocprojectsthatwillbedetailedinthe next section. Such hazardmaps, that are more frequently flood extensionmaps related to specificreturnperiodsare sent toEMA for validation riskevaluations. EMAon thebasisof suchmapsperformslocalvalidationwithsurveysand localpopulation inquiry.Onthebasisofsuch local inquirytheconcernsabouttheHazardmapsareannotatedandsentbacktoNEAforupdate.ThefinalmapisthensenttoEMAthat performs risk considerations based on the layering of Exposed elements onto the hazardmap anddetailscountermeasurestobeputintheemergencyresponseplanandmitigationmeasurestoreducerisk.Suchmitigationmeasuresarefiled inaLetterofRecommendationtothe localadministrationthatcan inturnevaluateiftheycanactonlocalbudgetorincaserequestnationalbudgetthroughEMAorMENRP.
4.2 Currentstatusofpracticesandareaofexcellence
As of today, inGeorgia FHMs and FRMs are available for the entire territory after theMATRA project -InstitutionalBuildingforNaturalDisasterRiskReduction(DRR)inGeorgia.Suchprojecthasbeenprovidingthe basic information about hazard in Georgia also for the ERRA in the first phase of the PPRD EastProgramme.Different institutions use themapping as a reference today, but suchmappingwould needupdate.Otherprojectslistedbelowaretryingtoupdatesuchmappingincaseoffloodingonapilotbasis.
WithinthePhase1ofthePPRDEastProgrammePartnerCountriesincludingGeorgiareceivedtrainingontheuseoftheMIKE11software.Thesoftwarecanbeofhelpinthedevelopmentofthefloodhazardmapswiththerightqualitystandards.PPRDEastPhase1committedtobuyMIKE11 licences forthecountriesbut never did. PPRD East Phase 2 expressed its willing to fulfil to this commitment, but since National
45
EnvironmentalAgencyisalreadyinpossessionoftwolicencesofMIKE11,EMAisnotinterestedinhavingyetanotherlicence.
4.2.1 PPRDEastProgrammePhase1
A nation-wide flood riskmapping has been developed during PPRD East Programme – Phase 1 by EMAusingtheinformationlayerprovidedbyNEAthroughtheMATRAproject,takingadvantage,aspointedout,ofthealreadydevelopednationwidehazardandriskmapping.AllthesemapswereincludedinERRAandcanbeconsultedinthelocalERRAnode.
The countrywide flood risk classification developed during PPRD East Phase 1 is a 4-level zonation ofGeorgiaatdistrict-scaleanditisavailabletoregisteredendusersontheERRAplatform.
4.2.2 InstitutionalBuildingandNaturalDisasterRiskReduction(DRR)inGeorgia(2009-2012)
The overall aim of the action was to reduce poverty, enhance food security and income and ensuresustainable development by fostering good governance for disaster risk reduction. The project goalwasinstitutionalcapacitybuildingoftheMinistryofEnvironmentalProtectionandNaturalResourcesindisasterrisk reduction via the introduction of modern spatial approaches, technologies and risk communicationstrategyinspatialplanninginGeorgia.
The main result of the project is the Geoportal of Natural Hazards and Risks in Georgia(http://drm.cenn.org/index.php/en/) that includeshazardandriskmaps,anda largeelectroniccatalogueofhazardeventsintheentireCountry.
SuchanAtlas isstillmaintainedactivebyCENN(http://w3.cenn.org/wssl/)while itsmigrationtotheNEAhasbeenalreadydiscussedandshouldhappeninthenearfuture.
4.2.3 Support the implementation process of the EU Directive on the assessment andmanagementoffloodrisksinGeorgia(2013-2015)
Georgia faces serious problems and challenges in the field of water management and environmentalprotection. It is well known that Georgia each year struggles with floods, landslides and mudflows.Accordingtostatistics,in2003-2009floodscauseddamageworthmorethan250millionUSD.Inthisregard,the implementationof theEUDirectiveon theassessmentandmanagementof floodriskswouldpermitprecise identificationofvulnerableareasandalsotakethenecessarymeasurestomitigatetheeffectsoffloods in Georgia, including the creation and issuance of timely and accurate hydrological forecasts andwarnings. This project included the review ofmajor legislation that is necessary to establish the overallframework for the implementationof theEUDirectiveanda feasibleRoadMap, theRoadMap includesdraftmeasuresforfloodprotectionandmapsoffloodhazardareas,andalsodefinestheconditionsfortheexerciseof the flood forecasting service inGeorgia (DraftDecree) as thebasic sourceof information fordealingwithexceptionalsituationsontheterritoryofGeorgia.
46
4.2.4 Anti-floodearlywarningandpreventionsystemsinGeorgia:specialfocusonKabaliandDurulirivers(2014-2015,on-going)
TheprojectisimplementedunderthesupportofthePolishMinistryofForeignAffairs.ThemainobjectivesoftheprojectaretoprovidetheHydro-meteorologicalDepartmentoftheNationalEnvironmentalAgencyoftheMinistryofEnvironmentandNaturalResourcesProtectionofGeorgia:
• Assessment/ResearchenhancingofthemonitoringcapabilityofNEAintherivers:Kabaliand,DurujiandAlazaniandthetributariesoftheAlazaniriver;
• Installationofforecastingtechnologicallinesfortherivers:KabaliandDurujiandthetributariesoftheAlazaniriver;
• Creationofthemodernearlywarningtechnologicalsystemintherivers:KabaliandDurujiandthemostvulnerabletributaryoftheAlazaniriver.
ThecorrespondinghardwareaswellasprogramsoftwarewillbepurchasedandinstalledinNEA.
IntendedResults/Outcomes:
• Rehabilitatedandextendednetworkofthehydrologicalautomaticstationsintherivers:KabaliandDurujiandthemostvulnerabletributaryoftheAlazaniriver(threeautomatichydrologicalgauges);
• Installedforecastingtechnologicallinesfortherivers:KabaliandDurujiandthetributaries(12)oftheAlazaniriver;
• Highresolutionandsuccessfuloutputsprovidedbymentionedmodels;
• Issuingthetimelyandeffectiveearlywarningsintheregion.
4.2.5 Developing Climate Resilient Flood and Flash Flood Management Practices to ProtectVulnerableCommunitiesofGeorgia(2012-2016,on-going)
TheprojectobjectiveistoimproveresilienceofhighlyexposedregionsofGeorgiatohydro-meteorologicalthreatsthatareincreasinginfrequencyandintensityasaresultofclimatechange.Theprojectwillhelptheself-governmentsandthepopulationofthetargetregionofRioniBasintodevelopadaptivecapacityandembarkonclimateresilienteconomicdevelopment.Theprojectiscomprisedofthreemaincomponents:
• Floodplaindevelopmentpolicyintroducedtoincentivizelongtermresiliencetoflood/flashfloodrisks;
• Climate resilient practices of flood management developed and implemented to reducevulnerabilityofhighlyexposedcommunities;
• Earlywarningsysteminplacetoimprovepreparednessandadaptivecapacityofpopulation.
Within the firstcomponent the first taskwouldbe toproducehazardand inundationmaps for theRioniBasin.Thesecondcomponentwilladdresspreventionandmitigationpracticesthatwillbebuildingblocks
47
for theFloodManagementPlanof theRioniBasin.The thirdcomponentaddresses theestablishmentofandEWSincompliancewiththeEUFDindications.
4.2.6 EnvironmentalProtectiononInternationalRiverBasins(2014-2015,on-going)
The Environmental Protection on International River Basins (EPIRB) project is a EU-funded initiativeimplementedbyaConsortium ledbyHulla&Co.HumanDynamicsKG.Thekeybeneficiary institutionoftheproject inGeorgia is theMENRP in its role tosupportsustainabledevelopmentof thecountry in thefieldofenvironmentandtoelaborateandimplementstatepolicy,targetprograms,nationalenvironmentalaction programs andmanagement plans in the field of environmental protection and natural resources.Additional beneficiaries are the Agency of Natural Resources under theMinistry of Energy and Naturalresourceswithitsfunctionsandresponsibilitiesforoverallenvironmentalmanagementinthecountry.ThePilot study for Georgia is the Chorokhi-Adjaristskali basin. Even if the initiative is much more orientedtowardswaterqualityandsupplymanagement,beneficiarycountriescanaskforsupportinimplementingFRMPsaspartoftheBMPsthatareatthecoreoftheproject.
4.3 FindingsandRecommendations
NEEDOFIMPROVEMENTCLASSIFICATION:HIGH,MODERATE,LOW
1–TranspositionofEUFDintonationallaw:MODERATE
Georgiahasa longtraditionofshapingits lawsanddecreestakingasanexampletheEUlegislation.Asaresult of that many pieces of legislation are already oriented towards the requirements of the EUFD.However the EUFD has not yet officially been transposed in the Georgian national legal framework.Following thestatements in theGeorgia-EUAssociationAgreementandAssociationAgenda,Georgiahasdeveloped a roadmap for the implementation of the EUFD and is seeking for support in the roadmapimplementation. PPRD East 2 is the ideal tool to provide assistance to Georgian institutions inimplementing such roadmap at least for the actions that can be covered within the timeframe of theProgram. The discussion related to the DRR strategy and its Implementation Plan, the Water Codeapproval, the sub-legislation linked to the Law on Civil Security, the upcoming National SustainableDevelopment Plan are a golden opportunity in order to translate favourable pieces of legislation in anapproximationpathtotheEUFD.
2–Unitsofmanagement:HIGH
As of September 2015 Georgia has no basin institutions or districts. Nevertheless, the upcomingWaterCode, in compliancewithWFD, establishes the basis for the identification of such units at theGeorgian
48
territory. It would be needed to properly mainstream this effort so that it can support the EUFDimplementation.
3–PreliminaryFloodRiskAssessment:LOW
PFRAareavailableontheentireGeorgianterritoryalthoughtheyneedtobeupdatedastheyarebasedonastudymainlydevelopedin2011.HowevertheyrepresentavalidstartforthecompliancewiththeEUFDrequirements.
4–FloodHazardandFloodRiskMaps:MODERATE
Again,hazardandriskmapsareavailableatnationalscalebuttheyneedtobeproducedinmoredetailedresolutionsothattheycanbeproperlyusedforthedevelopmentofmitigationmeasures.Specifically,theonesproducedby theMATRAprojectarenot in full compliancewith theEUFDas theyare limited tobeflood delineationmaps and do not report themaximumwater depth values associated to the differentreturnperiods.However, thenewpilot studyon theRioniRiver seems tobe in full compliancewith theEUFDIndications.TherecommendationistoinstitutionalizethemethodologyfollowedfortheRionibasinandproposeitasastandardatnationallevel.TheKurabasincanbethesecondpilotforthemethodologyapplication.
5–FloodRiskManagementPlans:HIGH
CurrentlytherearenoFRMPsoperatinginthecountry.TheNEAandEMAarebothawareabouttheneedtodeveloptheplanand,atthepracticallevel,partsoftheFRMPsalreadyareimplementedintheformofrecommendations to local authorities. This needs to be taken up at the legislation level and clearresponsibilityfordevelopment,implementationandupdateoftheplansneedstobeestablished.
6–Datasharing:LOW
Georgia isalreadyactive insharingthedataregardinghazardandriskmapping inorderto increasebothpublic awareness to flood hazard and flood risk, and the inter-institutional information exchange ofinformation.TheGeoportalofNaturalHazardsandRisksinGeorgiaisagoodexampleofdatasharing.ThechallengeforGeorgiaistoproperlycoordinatethedifferentinitiativesandfocustheinvestmentsinfuture.MentionedGeoportal isplanned tobe transferred toNEA. Inparallel,NEAwill receivea secondcountryinstallationofthePPRDEastERRAportal.TheGISunitofEMAmanagesbothcurrentinstallationofERRAanda localGeonodetostoregeographical informationrelatedtodisasters.ERRAwillalwaysmaintain itsroleinbeingthetooltoshareinformationintheregionatinternationalLevel.Atthenationallevel,Georgianeeds to internallyconfrontanddecideapossibleway forward incompliancewith thenewSDI lawthatwillbediscussedintheERRAchapteroftheexistingdocument.TherecommendationistomaintainERRA
49
asareferenceportalfordisasterrelatedinformationandassurefullinteroperabilitywithothersystemsinuseintherelevantinstitutions.
4.4 RoadMap
Coherentlywiththepreviousanalysisandfindings,thefollowingtablesummarizesapossibleroadmapconsistentwiththeroadmapdesignedalreadybytheGeorgianGovernment.
Topic Recommendation Who How When
EUFDtransposition
Draftaby-lawonmanagementof
floodrisksincludingrisk
assessmentinlinewithEUFD
MENRP(coordinator)
EMA
Establishinganinter-institutionalworkinggrouptodraftaby-law“onthemanagementofFloodRisktocomplywithAA
AnnexrequirementsfromEUFloodDirective
-Firstdraftby-lawpresentedfor
internaldiscussions(beginningof
2017)
-Finaldraftby-lawpresentedforpublichearings(autumnof2017)
-ApprovedbytheGovernmentandpublishedin
OfficialJournal(endof2017)
-Basicnationallegislationonfloodrisksmanagementshallbeinplaceby01September
2018
Unitsofmanagement
OfficialdesigningofRiverBasin
Councilsasmaindeveloperandimplementer
CabinetoftheMinisters/MENRP
UpdateoftheWaterCode
end2015
PreliminaryFlood Develop MENRP(NEA), Establishinga mid2016
50
RiskAssessment methodologicalguidelinesto
complywithEUFDrequirementsfrom
Articles4-6
EMA
(Coordinators)
workinggroupincludingallthestakeholders
PreliminaryFloodRiskAssessment
UpdatingandenhancingthecurrentPFRA
startingfromtheKurariverbasinas
aPilot
RiverBasinCouncils(whenestablished)withthehelpofNEA
andEMA
Applicationofthedeveloped
methodologies
-Preliminaryassessmentis
readyendof2017
-ApprovalofPFRAbySeptember
2019
FloodHazardandRiskMaps
Developmethodologicalguidelinesto
complywithEUFDrequirementsfrom
Articles4-6
MENRP(NEA),EMA
(coordinators)
Establishingaworkinggroupincludingallthestakeholders
mid2017
FloodHazardandRiskMaps
MapsdraftingstartingfromtheKurariverbasinas
aPilot
RiverBasinCouncils(whenestablished)withthehelpofNEA
andEMA
Applicationofthedeveloped
methodologies
-FHMandFRMfortheKuraBasinreadymid2018
-FloodRiskMapsforthewhole
territoryofGeorgiaareinplace
(Summer2021)
FloodRiskManagementPlans
IncludingEUFDprescriptions(Art.7)intoRBMPs
CabinetoftheMinisters/MENR
Updateofthecurrentlegislationonriverbasin
managementplans
-Firstdaftguidelineispresentedfor
internalconsultations(mid
of2017)
-Finalguidelineispresentedfor
externalconsultationswith
51
experts(endof2017)
-Guidelinesareapproved(2018)
FloodRiskManagementPlans
PlansdraftingRiverBasinCouncils
ApplicationoftheEUFDprescriptions
toRBMPsmid2021
FloodRiskManagementPlans
Enhancementoftheobservational
network
Hydro-metDepartmentof
NEA
(coordinator)
Purchase,installationandcalibrationofautomated
stationsfillingthegapsleftbypilotprojectsalreadyin
place
end2018
DataSharing
Openaccesstoflood-relateddataforpublicandinstitutions
EMAincoordinationwith
NEA
ProperprofilingoftheERRAplatform
Early2016
52
5 DisasterRiskAssessment
5.1 Legalandinstitutionalframework
With respect to the Disaster Risk Assessment, the legal situation in Georgia is very similar to the oneanalysedfortheEUFD.Manylawsandplansareunderdevelopment,thatincludesDisasterRiskReductionintheirobjectivesand,asaconsequence,DisasterRiskAssessmentasacornerstoneofDRR.Thefollowingareworthmentioning.
The Georgian Government put into place the Regional Development Programme 2015-2017. TheProgramme, developed with the support of the European Union, has as its main objective to ensurebalanced and sustainable socio-economic development across Georgia, particularly focusing on thedevelopmental inequalities both between greater Tbilisi area and the rest of the country, and on rural-urbandivisionsoutsidethecapital.TheProgrammewillspecifically focusoneconomicdevelopment, jobcreation, and improving thequalityof lifeof people includingDRRactivities and investments for a safersociety.ThisRegionalDevelopmentProgrammeisthefirstofsuchProgrammeamongEasternPartnershipcountriesthatreallyembodiesthewell-establishedprogrammingpracticesfoundwithintheEUandassuchwillbeamodelforotherPPRDEast2PartnerCountriestofollow.
In support of theProgram, the country’s newest versionof theBasicDataDirections (BDD) (2015-2018)includesdirections fordisasterriskmanagementsuchastheestablishmentofearlywarningsystemsanddisasterforecastandthemandatoryintegrationofenvironmentalissuesforurbandevelopmentbasedonproperriskknowledge(i.e.throughasolidDisasterRiskAssessment).
Disaster Risk Assessment is included in the National DRR Policy and Action Plan as a result of beingcompliantwith the requirementsof theSendaiFramework Indicators thathavebeenstrongly sponsoredand will be supported by the European Union. Such indicators include holistic and probabilistic riskassessmentmonitoring.Inparticularitisforeseentodevelopriskassessmentsanddisasterriskmanagingplanningatnationalorappropriate sub-national level (in linewithArticle6of theUnionCivil ProtectionMechanism legislation). The DRR Strategy and Action Plan will also be in line with the National ThreatAssessmentDocument,whichdescribesthethreatspendingonGeorgiaandwillbeastartingpointforthedevelopmentoftheActionPlan.Suchdocumentitisstillnotpublicandconsideredsensitive.
KeyAssessorsPPRDEast2Expert RobertoRudariCountryThematicFocalPoint IrakliSaneblidzeChaptervalidatedby IrakliSaneblidze
CountryAdvisoryGroup
53
Asamorepracticalstep,theLawonCivilSecurity(2014)statesthatEMAcoordinatesthedevelopmentofEmergencyRiskManagementPlansintendedaspreliminaryplanningdocumentsdevelopedbytheunifiedsystembodiesthatspecifiesthegoalsfordetecting,assessingandreducingemergencyrisks,includingthereductiontopotentialdamageandlossaswellasthepreventionofnewrisk.Thecontentofsuchplansisdemandedtothedevelopmentofsub-legislationanditisintheintentionofEMAnottolimitsuchplanstobecontingencyplans,butexpandingthemtobedisastermanagementplans.Thedefinitionofproperriskscenarios is central for the development and implementation of both a contingency plan and a disastermanagementplan.
5.2 Currentstatusofpracticesandareaofexcellence
Theriskassessmentproceduresregardingfloodshavebeenalreadydetailed inthechapteranalysingtheapproximationtotheEUFDwheretheroleofNEAandEMAisprominent.
TheroleofNEAisparticularlyimportantalsowithregardstolandslidesriskassessmentwithaverydetailedprocedurealreadyinplace.UndertheProvisionfortheestablishmentoftheEnvironmentalAgency,DecreeofMinistryofEnvironmentandNaturalResourcesProtection,nr.27,10May2013,(article5,par.5-6),NEAGeologicalDepartmenthasthemandatetomonitorgeologicalhazards.Theyproduceayearlybulletinpermunicipalitybasedonfieldsurveys,detailingdescriptionofthevillage’sconditionsandreportingaMapofLandslidespresentinglandslides’location,typologyanddimension.Susceptibilitymapsarealsoproduced.As a result of this local hazard and risk assessment, the bulletin proposes detailedmitigationmeasures.SuchbulletinisevaluatedbothbythemunicipalitiesandtheMinistryofInfrastructurethatisresponsibleforthemainroadsandinfrastructures.
ThestandardpracticeisdifferentinthecaseofseismiceventsastheresponsibilityforhazardmappingandassessmentisassignedtotheEarthScienceInstituteandtheInstituteofGeophysicsofIliaUniversitywhiletheleadofriskassessmentstayingwiththeMinistryofEconomywhichistheministrybehindtheapprovalofbuildingcodesinGeorgia.Georgia’scurrentbuildingcodesareout-datedandnotsystematized.TheyareamixofSovietUnion,American,British,German,andotherEuropeanstandards.Themostrecentaretheseismiccodesthatwerelastupdatedin2009,buttheyweremainlybasedon1980’sversionandtheyneedsubstantialrevision.Thisisalsotruewithrespecttohazardmapping.Infact,theNationalBuildingCodesofGeorgiaarebasedontheseismichazardmapdevelopedin1999.Slightlyupdatedin2006andadoptedin2009. Ilia University has already developed a detailed plan to review hazard maps as per the highestinternational standards. EMAhas a key role inmapping theexposure. Currently, amap that includes allrelevantfeaturesforseismicriskassessmentexistspartiallyforTbilisiaturbanblockresolution.Howeversuchmapisout-datedandwouldneedrevision.
All the hazard maps and information are currently available to registered users on the ERRA platforminstalled at EMA. As critical assets mapping is considered to be a very security-sensitive matter, onlyqualitative maps (3-class classification: high, medium and low) are available at the sub-regional and
54
regional level. Nevertheless, the quantitative critical infrastructure/asset maps were developed and areavailableatthenationallevel.
TheMethodologyforVulnerabilityandRiskAssessmentdevelopedbyPPRDEastPhase1isafundamentalpieceof information thatapparentlyhasnotbeen fullyexploitedbyGeorgian institutionsandshouldbebetter mainstreamed in the currently developed actions. It is worth noticing that the vulnerabilityassessmentmethodologydevelopedaccordingtoaholisticapproach isbasedoncategorizationofexpertjudgments, while a more quantitative/engineering approach making use of vulnerability and damagefunctionshasnotbeenproposedandwouldbeagoodcomplementtotheriskassessment.
5.3 FindingsandRecommendations
NEEDOFIMPROVEMENTCLASSIFICATION:HIGH,MODERATE,LOW
1–TranspositionofDRAEUGuidelinesintolegislativeframework:LOW
With regard to legal framework, the recently approved Regional Development Program elaborates theconcept of risk assessment - as part of risk management - into the national legislation. The RegionalDevelopmentProgramfollowstheEUapproachandstandardsthatwillbetakenasguidelines indraftingthenecessarylegislation.ThisissupportedalsobytheGeorgia–EUAssociationAgreementandAssociationAgenda.
Recommendation is to properly harmonize the several pieces of legislation in preparation (e.g., DRRNational Strategy and Action Plan, the Civil Protection sub-Legislation, The newNational EnvironmentalAction Program) to meet EU standards. In addition to that, it is recommended to identify responsibleinstitutionsforDRAforeachhazardattheprimarylawlevel.ResponsibilitieshavetobeclarifiedforDRAmethodologydevelopment,DRAstudiesdeliveryandrevisiononaregularbasis.Thishastobepairedwithaproperbudgetallocationtotheresponsibleinstitution.
2–Institutionalsetup:MODERATE
EMA is often indicated as a coordinating authority for the production of risk assessment relatedinformation.However,EMAhasaclearmandateforemergenciesmanagementandcontingencyplanning.Even ifDRAconstitutesabuildingblock for contingencyplanning,DRAshouldalso serveotherpurposes(e.g. strategic planning). These different purposes are served by different types of DRA. The impressionnowisthatEMArightfullyinterpretsDRAaspertheirmandateprimarilyforcontingencyplanningpurposes.EMAcancoordinateDRAatahigherlevelinformingotherinstitutionsactiveinmorestrategicinvestmentsoftheneedtotakeintoaccountDRAresults:MinistryofFinanceinpreparingtheBDDdocument,Ministryof Economy in drafting the National Spatial Planning Strategy for 2030, Ministry of Infrastructure toprioritize interventions on the different networks, etc. The development of the sub-legislation, including
55
the content of the Disaster Management Plans, as requested by the Law on Civil Security 2014, is thegolden opportunity and should not bemissed. This can be used to clarify the DRAmandate of EMA inrelation to all other institutions contributing to the development of the DRA (see “Current Status ofPractice” to identify them) and in coordination with the State Security and CrisisManagement Council,shoulduseaggregatedinformationfromDRAtofurtherdevelopDRRPolicies,StrategiesandActionPlansatthehigherlevel.
Recommendationisthereforetoclarifytheinter-institutionalrolesregardingDRAbyestablishingtheinter-institutionalworkinggroup(thatincludesSSCMC)inordertoagreeonthecontentoftheDRMPinregardtothedevelopmentofDRAinformation.
3–Hazardmapping:MODERATE
Aspresentedabove,hazardmappingexistsandthereareplansforthismappingreviewinthenearfutureregardingatleastthetwomajorhazards(i.e.floodsandearthquakes).Thesenewmapsshouldbe/willbeinlinewithEUstandards.
Arecommendationwouldbetodevelopanappropriatemulti-hazardapproachthat includesworstcasesanalysisofsimultaneousordominoeffectasalsostatedintheEUDRAGuidelines.
4–RiskMapping:HIGH
RiskmappingiscurrentlyavailableatdistrictscaleorcoarserfromthePPRDEastPhase1andtheMATRAproject. These projects developedpropermethodologies used for developingmaps at aggregated scalesduetothepooravailabilityoftheexposurelayers.
Therecommendationwouldbetodiscusswiththedifferentinstitutionsinvolvedinproducinghazardandrisk maps the purpose of the risk maps in order to develop methodologies of risk mapping that areappropriatefordifferentpurposes,e.g.,strategicplans,emergencyplans,contingencyplansetc.Afurtherrecommendation would be to develop an appropriate multi-hazard approach re-discussing the oneproposedbyPPRDEastPhase1,especiallywithregardstotheobjectivesandtheuseofmulti-hazardriskassessment.Infact,PPRDEastPhase1developedanaggregatedmulti-riskindicatorthatisgenerallygoodfor an initial scoping studywith the aim of refocusing on themost risky areas.When propermitigationmeasures need to be developed the methodology as such is of partial utility as stated in the officialdocumentationoftheProgramme.
5–DataSharing:LOW
Georgiahasagoodunderstandingoftheutilityofdatasharingforpublicawarenesstodisastersandinter-institutionalinformationexchange.Itisneededtoreorganizethewaythisinformationisshared,andinthissense the newproject on theNational Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) coordinated by theMinistry ofJustice (please refer to the INSPIREChapter formoredetailson theproject)willhelpand theERRA tool
56
shouldcomplytotheNSDIinordertobeusedbyGeorgianinstitutions.Rightnowmanyplatformsareusedwithalackofthematicstandardization.
Recommendation is todecideforauniquedirection(notmeaninganuniqueplatform)that iscommonlyunderstoodamongstinstitutions.
5.4 RoadMap
Topic Recommendation Who How When
EUapproximationintoDRAnational
law
Harmonizationoflegislationunderpreparation
CabinetofMinisters
SSCMCledconsultationswith
thedifferentministriesinvolvedinthelegislationdevelopment
Startearly2016
Institutionalsetup
Officialdesigningofcoordinatorsfor
DRAforeachhazard
EMAinconsultationwithallinstitutions
involved
DevelopmentofSub-LegislationoftheLawonCivil
Security
End2016
Hazardmapping
Developmentofmethodsformulti-
hazardassessment,fullycompliantwithEU
guidelines
EMA(coordinator)
Establishingaworkinggroupincludingallthestakeholders
2015-2017
(includingthemapdrafting)
RiskMapping
Developmentofmulti-risk
methodologiestocomplywithEU
guidelines
EMA(coordinator)
Establishingaworkinggroupincludingallthestakeholders
2015-2018
(includingmapsdrafting)
RiskMapping
Developmentofmulti-riskandmulti-purpose
methodologiestocomplywithEU
guidelines
EMA(coordinator)
Establishingaworkinggroupincludingallthestakeholders
2015-2018
(includingmapsdrafting)
57
DataSharing
DataSharingStrategyin
compliancywiththeNationalSDI
EMAandNEA
Establishingaworkinggroupincludingallthestakeholders,appropriate
profilingoftheERRAplatform
mid2016
58
6 DisasterLossDataCollectionandProcessing
KeyAssessorsPPRDEast2Expert RobertoRudariCountryThematicFocalPoint IrakliAlugishviliChaptervalidatedby CountryAdvisoryGroup
6.1 Legalandinstitutionalframework
Several pieces of legislation refer toDisaster LossData (DLD) collection andorganization inGeorgia andseveralinstitutionsareinvolvedindatacollectionandelaboration.Somerecentimportantonesneedtobementioned.AtfirsttheLawonCivilSecurityNo2467-IIсof29May20143–establishesunifiedemergencymanagement system,which in its turnunifiesall governmentalandnon-governmentalorganizationsandinstitutions and cancels previous regulations in the field of civil security. The Law on Civil Security wasadoptedasaresultoftheTwinningandPPRDEastProgramsandaimstoharmonizeGeorgiancivilsecuritymechanismswithEUstandards.AsorderedbytheLaw,theMinistryof InternalAffairsofGeorgiashouldensureby31December2015thepublicationoftheregulationsoncollecting,processingandtransmittingofemergencyinformation.TheLawalsostatesinArticle9,thatrefersto“keepingrecordsofemergency,firesandothereffects”,thatEMAshould“…providetheofficialstatisticsandStatestatisticalReportingofemergency, fires and other effects” - assigning therefore a clear role to EMA regarding the loss datacollection,butnotprovidingcleardetailsonwhatthestatisticsshouldcontain.
BeforethispieceofLawexisted,Georgiahadagenerallegislationonman-madeandnaturaldisasterslossaccounting. The accounting on fires being regulated by the Ministry of Internal Affairs and dedicatedlegislation, while the Centre of Seismic Monitoring under the Department of Seismology at ILIA StateUniversity is recordingdisasterdataonearthquakes.This last institutionhas thecapacityof fulfilling thislastmandate.
Anotherfundamentalpolicydocumentthatisplannedtobeapprovedtilltheendof2015istheNationalDRRStrategyandrespectiveActionPlan.TheActionPlanhas inoneof itsprioritiestheestablishmentoftheonlinecentralizedmulti-hazarddisasterrisk informationandknowledgesystemthat includesdataonhistorical disaster loss anddamage, aswell as hazard risk information (historic event catalogues, hazardmaps, exposure, vulnerability, potential damage and loss scenarios, demographic data, socio-economicdata) inorder toproduce theNationalDisasterRiskProfilesofGeorgia.This InformationandKnowledgeSystemshouldbecoordinatedbySSCMC.ItisclearthatSSCMChasanothercriticalroleinthecaseofDLDand a careful coordination between all institutions will be needed in order to avoid duplication andconfusionofresponsibilities.
3https://matsne.gov.ge/en/document/download/2363013/1/ru/pdf
59
6.2 Currentstatusofpracticesandareaofexcellence
Presently the collection of loss data has a solid operating procedure that activates mostly duringemergencies. EMAmanages the data collection on emergencies. The information is registered on local,municipalandregionallevel.Duringadisasteraspecialad-hocgroup(locallevelcommission)ofspecialistsandscientistsisestablished.TheinformationofanemergencyisenteredusingspecificreportingformsinidentifiedDataCards.During theemergencyor in the immediateaftermathofanevent the informationcollected from the scene of a disaster is sent to EMA and other interested organizations (Ministries).Howeverthispertainsmainlytothedatafundamentalforemergencies(e.g.dataonaffectedpeople)whilethe Disaster Loss Data structure should be more comprehensive to match the required internationalstandards including theoneproposedbyEUrecently4.Georgia,however,collectsallneeded informationusingtheexpertiseofdifferentinstitutions.
Ministry of Finance provides experts for the economic damage estimates to be delivered to SSCMCandmunicipalities and prepares respective report. NEA prepares a detail census on the physical impact anddelineationofthehazard,aswellassomesuggestedmitigationactionstobetakenduringtheemergency.A report is filed anddelivered to SSCMCand to EMA. Similar conditionexists for earthquakeswhen theCentreofSeismologicalMonitoringandILIAUniversityprovidesimilarreporting.
Asmallquantityofthesedataisstoredinaproperorganizeddatabaseandevenasmallerquantityislinkedto a geospatial database. Evenmore importantly, data are not stored in one, unified place but kept onrecordformsindifferentinstitutions.Eachoftheseinstitutionsproducesdataseparatelyfromtheothers.Additionally, these dataset are considered as local dataset to be given to municipalities and there iscurrentlylittleeffortincompilinganationwideviewofsuchdata.
Asaresult,todayinGeorgiaaunifiedsingledatabaseondisastersusedbyallMinistriesdoesnotexist.AnattemptforanationaldatabasehasbeentriedbyEMA.ThetimeperiodcoveredbyEMAdatabaseisfrom2006.Thedatabaseisindigitalformat.Before2006thereisapaperarchiveinDepartmentofStatisticsintheMinistry of Economy. However, this EMA database suffers from the flaws explained previously andother institutions maintain their own databases on disasters data by economic sectors: Ministry ofEnvironmentandNaturalResourcesProtection,MinistryofFinance,MinistryofAgriculture,andMinistryofTransport.Thequalitycontroliscarriedoutonhighstandardsandtherearespecialfundsallocatedforthisprocedure.
Anothernationaldatabasewasdevelopedby theMATRAProjectbyCENN incooperationwithNEA.Thisdatabaseismainlyaneventdatabasewithimpactinformationaswell,andisavailablethoughtheNationalAtlasonNaturalHazardandRisk.SuchadatabaseisthepropertyofNEAandispartiallymaintained.ThispairswiththeonemaintainedbyILIAUniversityonseismicevents.
Alltheseeffortslackincoordinationandshouldbeproperlymainstreamed.
4JRCpublicationonminimumstandards
60
Defining the threshold forDisaster LossData recording isnot clearly indicatedandeach levelofdisastershould be mapped. The classification of disasters is based on CIS5classification, with some changesaccordingtothelocalconditionsofacountry.TheemergencyclassificationisdefinedbytheLawonCivilSecurity No 2467-IIс of 29 May 2014. Emergencies are classified depending on the origin, distribution,numberoffatalitiesandmateriallosses.EmergencysituationsontheterritoryofGeorgiabytheoriginaredivided into: natural, man-made, social and military. Several levels of emergencies are determined,depending on the extent of the effects, response forces, material resources required to eliminateconsequences,aswellastheareaofdistributionandscaleofanemergency.Thefinallevelsofemergenciesare:facility,local,regional,autonomous,andnational.
6.3 FindingsandRecommendations
NEEDOFIMPROVEMENTCLASSIFICATION:HIGH,MODERATE,LOW
1) Adapt current legislation and operational procedures to improve data collection and enable thesharingoflossdataatEuropeanandInternationallevel:MODERATE
CISmember stateshasadopted in recentyearsa common terminology fordisasters classificationand inparticular for what concerns the affected elements. Anyway, with the aim of a more internationally-widespread sharingofdata, itwouldbebeneficial tomove towards international standardsdesignedbyINSPIRE initiative or Integrated Research on Disaster Risk (IRDR) classification andmore recently by theEuropeanDisasterLossWorkingGroupleadbyJRCmandatedbyDGECHO.
ItisrecommendedtoincludeinthecurrentlegislationandoperationalprocedurestherequirementsoftheGuidance for recording and sharing disaster damage and loss data (JRC, 2015). Specifically it isrecommendedtoadopttheExtension2oftherecommendations(Extension2:dataforspecificevents,foraspecifichazard,damageand lossperNUTS2/NUTS3andUnitofManagement (UoM),byeconomicsectorandbyownerandbystatusofownership(whobearsthelosses)).
2)Developandadoptaunifiedmethodologyforassessingeconomiclossesfromdisaster:MODERATE
The indicators for affected element (material consequences) of disasters are clearly defined by currentlegislationandoperationalprocedures,however there isa lackofaunifiedmethodologicalapproach forcollectingandrecordingtheassociatedeconomiclossesaswellasforindirecteconomiclossesfordifferentsectors.
It is recommendedtodevelopandadopt incurrent legislationamethodologyformulti-sectoraleconomicassessmentofdisasterlosses.
5CommonwealthofIndependentStates-CIS
61
3)Uncertaintyassessment:HIGH
Uncertainties are inherent in every stepof thedisaster loss data analysis framework. Itwouldbe surelybeneficialtoadoptaninternationalstandard-basedevaluationoftheuncertaintyineverystepofthelossdata collection and reporting, adopting – as an example -MAXOorNUSAP techniques. This uncertaintyevaluationshouldbestoredandrecordedwiththefinalvalidatedversionofthedata.
It is recommended to legally establish a shared methodology to estimate uncertainty and improve thequalitycontrolofdata.
4)FulldevelopmentofanadvancedITsystem:HIGH
Databasesneedtobeproperlymaintained.Forthat,thedesignandthemaintenanceofalossinformationtechnology (IT) infrastructure to facilitate and optimize data collection, storage and interpretation, isessential.Manyoftherequirementsthatmaybethoughtofintermsofdamagedatacollectionatvariouslevels (local, regional and national) may clearly benefit significantly from a well-designed IT systemincluding an appropriate data model. Georgia has now a clearly underdeveloped system for loss datarecordingandthisisclearlyperceivedandunderstoodbyallinvolvedinstitutions.
Recommendationistodetermineacoordinatinginstitutionatnationallevel(e.g.SSCMC,EMAorEMAforSSCMC)thatinteractsproperlywithallotherstakeholders.Inthissensetheproposedcentralizedsysteminthe DRR Action Plan could be a leading action. All these efforts should also be mainstreamed with thedevelopmentoftheNationalSpatialDataInfrastructurecoordinatedbytheMinistryofJustice.ERRA,andthepossibilityofenhancingitsfunctionalityforcollecting,recordingandanalysisoflossdatacouldhelpintheprocess,withtheadvantageoffurthersharinginformationandstatisticsatregionallevelwithintheEaPCountries.
5)EncouragingPuPandPPP:HIGH
Theseparationandnon-interoperabilityof thedifferentdisaster lossdatabases isclearlyaweakpointofthe systemas awhole. For this reason, the implementationof loss databases shouldbe embedded in aPublic-PublicPartnership (PUP)orPublicPrivatePartnership (PPP) ifneeded, toensureparticipationandownershipofallstakeholders.
Recommendation is therefore to strengthen at first the inter-institutional coordination in constituting aunifiedDLDandafterthatopenuptoPPPforanenhanceddatamodelincludingpossibilitiesoffacilitatingthedevelopmentofriskfinancingoptions.
6)Informationsharing:LOW
62
Allanalysed lossdatabasesdonotprovidepublicaccessexcept for theNationalAtlasonNaturalHazardandRisk.
Thedevelopmentofasharingpolicyusinganopendataapproachinacommondatastandardwillcertainlysupportbothtrans-boundaryandinternationalriskreductionprocesses(includingtheSendaiFramework).
7)Supportinglegislationandactiveinvolvementoflocalgovernments:MODERATE
Finally,onlyastrongnational legislation thatprovidesevidenceofpolitical commitmentcansupport thepreviouspoints.
Recommendationistolookatthethreedocumentsdiscussedinthelegislationsectionasawholeandnotasindependentdocuments.BasedontheapprovedLawonCivilSecurityitisneededtoclarifytheprioritiessketchedintheDRRActionPlanandtocarefullybuildtheITsystemincomplianceandinexploitationoftheupcomingNSDI.Localgovernmentsarealreadyactivepartofthelossdatacollectionprocess.
6.4 RoadMap
Topic Recommendation Who How When
Legislation
Adaptcurrentlegislationandoperationalprocedurestoenablethe
sharingoflossdataatEuropeanandInternational
level
SSCMC/EMA
WorkinggroupledbySSCMfordrafting
theupdateofcurrent
legislation/regulation
Startearly2016–endearly
2017
Methodology
Developandadoptaunifiedmethodologyfor
assessingeconomiclossesfromdisaster
includingamulti-sectoral
assessment
SSCM/EMAandallstakeholders
Establishamulti-stakeholdersworkinggroupledbySSCMfortheelaborationofthemethodology
Startmid2016-end2016
Uncertaintyassessment
Methodologyfortheuncertaintyassessment
EMAinconsultation
withall
WorkinggrouponUncertainty
assessmentledbyend2016
63
institutionsinvolved
EMA
FulldevelopmentofanadvancedIT
system
Mainstreamingofthealready
presenteffortsintoasinglePlatform
EMA(coordinator)
EstablishingaworkinggrouponthetechnicallevelincludingallthestakeholderswiththesupportofPPRDEASTIIITexperts
Startmid2016–endearly
2017
EncouragingPuPandPPP
Inter-institutionalcoordinationforthecentralized
DLD
SSCMC
Establishingaworkinggroupincludingallthestakeholders
2015-2018(includingmaps
drafting)
Informationsharing
Definitionofrulesfortheinformationsharing,
especiallywiththewiderpublic
EMA(coordinator)
Establishingaworkinggroupincludingallthestakeholders
Early2017
Supportinglegislationand
activeinvolvementof
localgovernments
Clarifythepriorities
sketchedintheDRRactionPlanaccordingtotheexistingLawonCivilSecurity
SSCMC
Establishingaworkinggroupincludingallthestakeholders
early2016
Supportinglegislationand
activeinvolvementof
localgovernments
BuildtheITsystemin
complianceandinexploitationoftheupcoming
NSDI
EMA(coordinator)
Establishingaworkinggroupincludingallthestakeholders,
appropriateprofilingoftheERRAplatform
Startmid2016–endearly
2017
64
7 InclusionofDisasterRiskReductioninPublicSpending
KeyAssessorsPPRDEast2Expert AntonínPetrCountryThematicFocalPoint N/AChaptervalidatedby OtarKereselidze
CountryAdvisoryGroup
7.1 Legalandinstitutionalframework
Thebudget legislationframeworkisprovidedbytheBudgetaryCodeofGeorgia,№2935of12December2014.
InArticles32,70and93,itprovidesspecialprovisionsforcreationandutilisationofemergencybudgetsatdifferentlevelsofstateadministration.
InArticles28and90,itprovidesspecialprovisionforcreationandutilisationofReserveFundsofPresidentofGeorgia and theGovernmentofGeorgia. The total sizeof each fund shall notexceed2%of the totalallotmentsenvisagedbytheannualbudget.
7.2 Currentstatusofpracticesandareaofexcellence
The State Budget of Georgia is formed by budget programmes. In the Budget for 2015, there are fourministries (Ministry of Interior, Ministry of Regional Development and Infrastructure, Ministry ofEnvironmentandNaturalResourcesProtection,andMinistryofDefence)whichareimplementingDisasterRiskReduction(DRR)and/orDisasterRiskManagement(DRM)relatedbudgetprogrammes.
Allocation of funds for 2015 for the programmeunder theMinistry of Interior – “Increasing Civil SafetyLevel” with the programme code 30 06 (http://mof.ge/images/File/sax-biujeti/TAVI%20VI.pdf) is 20.0millionGel,approx.7.7millionEUR.
ProgramCode Name 2015budget(thousandEUR)
3006 IncreasingCivilsafetyLevel 7700,0
Expenses 7,200,0
UseofGoodsandServices 6100,0
Otherexpenses 1100,0
65
IncreaseofNonfinancialAssets 380,0
Two programmes are implemented by the Ministry of Regional Development and Infrastructure: a)Eradicate and Prevent Natural Disasters; b) Shore Protection Works (http://mof.ge/images/File/sax-biujeti/1.ganmaxorcieleblebi%20III%20cardgena.pdf):
ProgramCode Name 2015budget(thousandEUR)
25020205 EradicateandPreventNaturalDisasters 2800,0
Expenses 2800,0
UseofGoodsandServices 2800,0
25020207 ShoreProtectionWorks 2600,0
IncreaseofNonfinancialAssets 2600,0
Fire prevention programme (38 04 05) within “Implementation and Management of Forestry System”(programcode3804) is implementedby theMinistryof Environment andNatural ResourcesProtectionhttp://mof.ge/images/File/sax-biujeti/1.ganmaxorcieleblebi%20III%20cardgena.pdf:
Within the programme “Promotion of Scientific Research” (programme code 24 08) 4.0 million GEL(approx.1.5millionEUR)isallocatedinthesubprogram“LEPL–StateMilitaryScientific-TechnicalCentre–DELTA”foranti-hailactivitiesfromtheregionaldevelopmentfundin2015.TotalstatebudgetallocationofLEPL is 26.4 million GEL (approx. 10.5 million EUR). This program is implemented by the Ministry ofDefence:
ProgramCode Name 2015budget(thousandEUR)
380405 Firepreventionworks 350,0
Expenses 130,0
UseofGoodsandServices 130,0
IncreaseofNonfinancialAssets 220,0
66
ProgramCode Name 2015budget(thousandEUR)
2408 LEPL–StateMilitaryScientific-TechnicalCentre–DELTA(antihailactivities) 1700,0
Expenses 900,0
UseofGoodsandServices 900,0
IncreaseofNonfinancialAssets 500,0
IncreaseoffinancialAssets 300,0
FromtheRegionalDevelopmentFund2015morethan6millionGel(approx.2.3millionEUR)isallocatedtodifferentmunicipalitiesfortheeliminationofnaturaldisaster:
Name Budget(thousandEUR)(01.01.-11.06.2015)
AutonomousRepublicofAchara 512,0
BatumiMunicipality 384,0
KobuletiMunicipality 163,0
KhelvachauriMunicipality 454,7
Self-governmentCityRustavi 179,0
TetritskaroMunicipality 236,4
AspindzaMunicipality 261,1
TianetiMunicipality 22,7
OniMunicipality 208,0
TotalSum 2335,9
Thebudgetexpendituresplanningprocessisdonethroughanon-linerealtimeelectronicplatformcallede-Budget.Theexecutionoftheexpendituresisdonethroughanotherrealtimeelectronicplatformcallede-Treasury.
7.3 FindingsandRecommendations
Itispossibletoconcludethattheexistinglegalandinstitutionalframeworkprovidesasoundandsolidbaseforbudgetplanning for civil protectionanddisaster riskmanagement. In addition, theon-lineelectronic
67
platforms (e-Budget and e- Treasury) for budget planning and execution provide good overview of theoverall funds planned and spent for DRR and DRM activities. Thus, it contributes to and provides goodpotential for the country to meet the Sendai Framework for Risk Reduction 2015 - 2030, priority 2 –“Strengtheningdisasterriskgovernancetomanagedisasterrisk”.
However, despite this good existing system, there is a big potential for additional enhancement of thestructureofthebudgetprogrammingwhichwouldallowmoredetailedinsightintofinancialaspectsofallindividualDRR andDRM related actions, particularlywhen they involve actionswhich are less obviouslyrelated toDRR andDRMor are not part of the programmes listed above. The ability to clearly identify,recordandconsequentlyevaluateallexpenditureswithintheDRR/DRMatnationaland local levelwouldsignificantly help better planning and better use of the available financial resources what is evenmoreimportantwhenthefundsarelimited.
Inaddition,itwouldalsoallowcomparisonoftherealDRR/DRMexpendituresagainstthedisasterlossdata.ThiscomparisonwillhelptoprovethatwellplannedinvestmentsintoDRR/DRMsignificantlydecreasetheimpactofdisastersonpopulation,environment,economy,infrastructureandculturalheritage,thusequallydecrease the human and economic losses, i.e. saving money for response activities and liquidation ofdisasterconsequences.
ItisalsosupportedbytheSendaiFrameworkforRiskReduction2015-2030whichputanadditionalaccenton“Investing indisasterriskreductionforresilience”(priority3),moreparticularlyon“promotionoftheintegrationofdisasterriskreductionconsiderationsandmeasuresinfinancialandfiscalinstruments”.
Inorder toaddress theabove-identified issues, thePPRDEast2 recommends todevelopand implementnewmethodologiesforallocation,tracking,registeringandevaluatingallDRRandDRMrelatedactionsinthe budget system at both levels – central and local. This will enable identification of exact amountsinvested into prevention, preparedness and response, as well as, to reconstruction and rehabilitationmeasuresbythevariousnationalandlocalstakeholders.Specifically,recommendationsareto:
• revise and if not sufficient, to enhance the national institutional CP/DRM framework in order toprovide/createadequate capacity fordevelopmentand implementationof theDRR/DRMbudgetallocationtrackingsystem;
• developandimplementamethodologyfortheDRR/DRMbudgetallocationtrackingandrecordingsystemacrossthenationalsystemandreplicateitatthelocallevel.Asapartofthemethodology,establish aDRR/DRM“marker” to flag those investments forwhich theoutcome isnot explicitlyDRR/DRMbutwhichthroughtheirimplementationwillcontributetoreduce/mitigatedisasterrisk;
• develop and implement a methodology for evaluation of the DRR/DRM expenditures that givesimplequantifiableindicatorsshowingfiscalimpactoftheDRR/DRM;
• create and deliver trainings on the newmethodologies for officials from financial units from allrelevantnationalinstitutionsdealingwithDRR/DRMmeasuresdirectlyorindirectly.
68
7.4 RoadMap
The roadmap proposes the prioritization of the recommendations, timeframe for their implementationandresponsibilitiesofinvolvedinterlocutors.
Activity1.1-WorkshoptointroduceanddiscusstheconceptoftheDRRbudgetallocationtrackingandrecordingsystem
Responsibility:SharedresponsibilityoftheEMA,MoFandPPRDEast2Programme
Timeframe:byApril2016
Support:allnationalinterlocutorsactiveinDRR/DRM
Activity 1.2 - Development of themethodology for the DRR budget allocation tracking and recordingsystem
Responsibility:SharedresponsibilityoftheMoFandEMA
Timeframe:byOctober2016
Support:PPRDEast2Programme
Activity1.3-DevelopmentofthemethodologyforevaluationoftheDRRexpenditures
Responsibility:SharedresponsibilityoftheMoFandEMA
Timeframe:byMarch2017
Support:PPRDEast2Programme
Activity1.4-Developmentofthetrainingcurriculumonthenewmethodologies
Responsibility:PPRDEast2Programme
Timeframe:byJune2017
Support:MoFandEMA
Activity1.5-Finalisationofthetrainingprogrammepreparation
Responsibility:PPRDEast2Programme
Timeframe:bySeptember2017
Support:MoFandEMA
69
Activity1.6–Draftingandendorsementofa legaldocumentto institutionalisethenewsystemfortheDRRbudgetallocationtrackingandrecordingsystem
Responsibility:MoFandEMA
Timeframe:byDecember2017
Support:PPRDEast2Programme
Activity1.7–Deliveryofthetrainingonthenewmethodologies
Responsibility:SharedresponsibilityoftheEMAandPPRDEast2Programme
Timeframe:byJanuary2018
Support:MoF
Activity 1.8 – Implementation of the newmethodologies for the DRR budget allocation tracking andrecordingsystemandforevaluationoftheDRRexpenditures
Responsibility:SharedresponsibilityoftheMoFandEMA
Timeframe:byJune2018
Support:allnationalinterlocutorsactiveinDRR
70
8 HostNationSupport
KeyAssessorsPPRDEast2Expert PhilLangdale
MichaelElmquistCountryThematicFocalPoint TeimurazMelkadzeChaptervalidatedby OtarKereselidze
CountryAdvisoryGroup
8.1 Legalandinstitutionalframework
Numerousaspectsofhostnationsupportarecoveredwithinthefollowingpiecesoflegislation:
• LawonCivilSecurity;
• National Response Plan on Man-made and Natural Disasters of 26 August 2008 describing 17functions of emergency management, including the authorities responsible in each and thecooperation links between them. One function is specifically dedicated to the provision ofdiplomaticprotocolandinternationalhumanitarianaid;
• MinistryofFinanceordernr.106of18February2010onthe“Facilitationofcustomdeclarationsandapprovalofinstructions”introducingtemplatesforcustomsclearanceofincomingassistance;
• Memorandum of Understanding between Georgia and NATO on the facilitation of vital cross-bordertransport(though,Georgianotes, it isnotlegallybinding)settingupaframeworkforhostnationsupportforNATOoperations;
• Bilateral disaster relief agreementswith Azerbaijan, Armenia, Israel, Jordan, Kazakhstan, RussianFederation,TurkmenistanandUkraine.
Internationalagreements/guidelinesGeorgiahassignedup/pledgedtoare:
• IstanbulConventionontemporaryadmission,andUNINSARAGGuidelines;
• Agreement among theGovernmentsof theBlack SeaEconomicCooperation (BSEC)ParticipatingStates on collaboration in emergency assistance and emergency response to natural and man-madedisasters,signedon15April1998. AdditionalProtocolonestablishinganetworkof liaisonofficerswassignedon20October2005.
8.2 Currentstatusofpracticesandareaofexcellence
Georgia’shostnationsupportframeworkisdefinedbyvariouslegalmeasuresalreadyinplacedespitethestructurenotbeingdeveloped6.
6StudyontheProvisionofInternationalAssistanceandHostNationSupport
71
Theexistingsystemhasbeentestedduringsomeemergencies,suchas,mostrecently,thearmedconflictin2008and theearthquake in2009aswell asduring the “Georgia2012” large-scale internationalexerciseorganised in partnership with NATO/EADRCC, when international assistance was received. Additionally,Georgiareportsthatthecivilprotection/disasterriskmanagementsector isfamiliarwiththeconceptofhostnationsupportingeneral.Also,thecooperationacrosssectorsthatisestablishedonthebasisoftheNationalResponsePlanenablesothersectorstohaveanideaabouthostnationsupport.GeorgiareportstofollowNATOandUNguidelines.
The Crisis Management Interagency Operative Centre is set up at the headquarters of the EmergencyManagementAgency,whichcomprisesofrepresentativesofothersectorsinvitedasappropriateonad-hocbasis. This Centre analyses and processes the incoming information, coordinates the intervention and isresponsible for the receipt anddistributionof international assistance. Its activities aredivided into foursectors:operations,informationmanagement,logisticsandfinance.
The Field Operations Centre functions as the on-site command centre for direct management of theintervention.Ithas,amongstothers,aliaisongrouptoensurecommunicationinbetweentherespondersonthefield,andaninformationgrouptoprocessfieldinformationtothedecisionmakersandthepublic.
8.3 FindingsandRecommendations
Whilst host nation support is understood in Georgia, it is clear that it is still in its early stages. TheappointmentofaHNSFocalPointforthePPRDEastPhase2Programmewillonlyaddvaluetotheprogressofhostnationsupportwithinthecountry.
It iscrucialforaneffectiveandefficientacceptanceofinternationalassistancethatGeorgiahassolidandsystematicsolutions,whichhave,inadvanceoftheemergency,identifiedandaddressedall(oratleastthemostcommon/expected) legal issues thatmayconstituteobstacles to theoverallobjectiveof facilitatingacceptance of international assistance. Host nation support requires the backing of laws and sub laws,which are to be developed and adopted prior to the event happening, so that ad hoc decisions are notperformed in the field during emergencies. The responsibility falls on the relevant governmentdepartments to coordinate and jointly develop these regulations (SOPs) to provide a solid platform onwhichtoperformhostnationsupportdutiesintheeventofGeorgiarequestingandreceivinginternationalassistance. As a priority, the Emergency Management Agency (EMA) should engage the relevantdepartments to develop the SOPs for host nation support for personnel to refer to in the time of anemergency.TheseshouldbetriedandtestedattheforthcomingPPRDEast2HNSTTXscheduledforthe5-7April2016.
Whilst the CrisisManagement Interagency Operative Centre is functional for emergencies, it requires afullyfunctionaloperatingsystemintermsofhostnationsupportSOPs.ThisCentreshouldbeusedfortheorganisationofthePPRDEast2HNSTTXinGeorgia.ThereforetheGeorgianauthoritiesshouldensurethat
72
anysubsequentnationalandlocalexercisesshouldincludetrainingonhostnationsupportusingdevelopedSOPs.
8.4 RoadMap
Asthedepartmentresponsibleforthecoordinationofallrescueactivitiesandreliefoperations,theEMAshouldheadthedevelopmentofhostnationsupportSOP,and inordertoachievea fully functionalhostnationsupportstructureby2018,thefollowingmilestonesmustbeachieved.
The EMA will ensure all levels of emergency management authorities/actors are aware of the EUCPMechanism.
Forhostnationsupporttobesuccessful,itisvitalthatcooperationbyallassociateddepartmentsisagreedandunderstoodandforthatreason,by theendof2015,EMAneedto initiateandengagethefollowingdepartments, to assist in the development of SOPs in the case of a request for, and acceptance of,internationalassistance:
• Ministry ofHealth - to carry out drug/medicine control, providemedical assistance and regulatetheproblemsoftheincomingmedicalpersonnel;
• State Revenue Service – to simplify/adjust customs & import procedures of all the rescueequipmentandgoodsandfinancialsupport;
• MinistryofAgriculture–toprovidefood;
• MinistryofForeignAffairs–simplifyvisaproceduresandcoordinationofrequestforinternationalassistanceprocess;
• Police - ensure security and safety of international assistance teams and provide escorts ifnecessary;
• MinistryofCommunicationandTransport–toprovidetransportandcommunicationservices;
• Civil Aviation Agency – to provide comprehensive assistance and provision of all the necessaryservicesattheairportlevel.
Bytheendof2016,writtenSOPs,whicharedocumentscontainingtheHNSknowledgeandidentifyingtheroleofeachpartnershouldbeset inplace.TheSOPtemplate, includedintheAnnex1tothisdocument,should be used to complete this process. However it must be understood that this template is notexhaustiveandcontingenciesneedtobeagreed.Thesedocumentsshouldbedraftedby the timeof theorganisationoftheHNSTTXinGeorgia,sothedraftSOPscanbeused.
Finalised HNS SOPs should be developed by the middle of 2018. Use of the EU Host Nation SupportGuidelines(HNSG)andtemplatesishighlyrecommended7.
Up to themiddle of 2018,EMAshoulddevelopandadopta regularprogrammeofexercises,whichwill
7EUHostNationSupportGuidelines
73
assist in thecapacitybuildingandtrainingofhostnationsupportofficers.Theseexerciseswillalsoassistotherdepartmentstounderstandhostnationsupport.
74
9 EUapproachtoVolunteerisminCivilProtection
KeyAssessorsPPRDEast2Expert DavideMiozzo
CountryThematicFocalPoint IliaKhurtsidzeChaptervalidatedby CountryAdvisoryGroup
9.1 Legalandinstitutionalframework
In recent times (2013-2015), the Georgian disaster risk management system has greatly evolvedreorganizing roles and duties of themain stakeholders. First of all, the former EmergencyManagementDepartment(undertheMinistryofInternalAffairs)became,withtheadoptionofLawonCivilSecurityof29May2014,amoreindependentandagileAgency(EmergencyManagementAgency-EMA).Thisallowedthe Agency to establish a better command and control chain based on the National Emergency PlanadoptedonthebasisofPresidentialDecreen.415of26August2008.ThisPlaniscurrentlyunderrevisioninordertoadaptalltheinstitutionalchangesbutprovidesafirstframeworkforemergencyresponsecoveringtheentireemergencycycleandsettingduties/obligationsforthestakeholdersinvolvedinpreventionandmanagementofmanmadeanddisasterscausedbynaturalhazards.
TheLawonCivilSecurityaddressesminimallytheissueofvolunteerismintwoarticles:
• art.26(Rightsandobligationsofthepopulationinprotectingthepopulationandtheterritoryfromemergencies)providesatpoint1.etherightofthepopulationto“joinvolunteerrescueteamsandlearntherulesofbehaviourduringemergencies”;and
• art.51(Rightsandobligationsofentrepreneurialandnon-entrepreneurial(non-commercial) legalpersonsinthefieldoffiresafety),setsanobligationintermofsupportofactivatesofvolunteerfirefighters.
Volunteersarethusforeseenlegallyaspartofthedisastermanagementsystembutthereisnotyetalegalframework,whichclarifiestherole,duties,obligationsandrights.Currently,thankstotheconjointeffortoftheEmergencyManagementAgency,theCivilSociety Institute(CSI)andtheGeorgianRedCross(GRC),adraft Law on Volunteering is being revised by the Parliament. This draft sets a general framework forvolunteerismbydefining:
• generaldefinitionofvoluntarism,
• roleofthe“hostingorganization”8,
• rightsandobligationsofvolunteersandhostorganizations,
8 This term could lead to a deceptive understanding if read from a European perspective. The EU Aid Initiative(http://ec.europa.eu/echo/what/humanitarian-aid/eu-aid-volunteers_en),which is settingupaEuropean corps of volunteers,
defines “hosting organization” as an organization, which will host volunteers deployed by a “sending organization”. The
Georgianmeaningisdifferentashostingorganizations,inthiscase,aretheorganizationsresponsiblefordifferentvolunteering
groupswithinnationalborders.
75
• coverageofcostsassociatedwithvoluntaryactivities,
• safeenvironmentandthecontracttobestipulatedwiththevolunteer(economicaldisbursement,training,minimumlabourstandards,contractualframework,etc.).
Thedraft,ontheotherhand,doesnotprovidetheoperativeframeworkpreciselyestablishingtheroleofavolunteer in civil protection activities. In other words, this Law will provide the basis for setting up aregulated environment for volunteering but there is a substantial lack in specification of a set of rulesapplicableundertheveryspecifictopicofpreventionanddisasterriskmanagement.
Moreover,theLawonCivilSecuritydefines(art.6)theproceduresforestablishingaunifiedsystemforthemanagementofemergencysituations('theUnifiedSystem').WithinthissystemtheGRC,accordingtothenational legislation, coordinates all the activities of NGOs and voluntary formations during peace andemergencytimes.
9.2 Currentstatusofpracticesandareaofexcellence
Figure 1 Volunteers (green boxes) in the Unified Emergency Management System
76
The lackofaspecificandaccurate legal framework isnotreflected inthe institutionalsetup.Volunteersare widespread throughout Georgia and are actively used and deployed in emergency times (Figure 1).Volunteerformationsatmunicipalandrurallevelaccountforapproximately1000volunteers9withatleast1 teamofvolunteerspresent ineachof the64municipalities in thecountry.TheRedCrossaccounts for2000activevolunteers10andafewmorehundredareaccountablewithinothervolunteeringnetworks.TheGRCandtheEMAhavesignedaMOU(originalwasnotobtainedduringassessment),whichestablishestheframework for the collaboration between the two agencies, and the partnership was consolidated andinstitutionalizedbythePresidentialDecree.
Mainareasofinterventionofthevolunteerunitsareurbanandforestfires,firstaid,mountainrescue,andfloodresponseandrecovery.TheCPvolunteeringsystemalsoincludesvolunteerformations,whicharenotinstitutionalizednorarepartoforganizationsorassociations.However,thosegroupsarecalledtosupportCP in itsactivities.Basedonreceived information,EMAandGRCprovidetrainingforvolunteers,developfieldexercisestotestandimprovethelevelofpreparation,andwheneverpossible,theyalsoprovide,basicequipment.
9.3 FindingsandRecommendations
NEEDOFIMPROVEMENTCLASSIFICATION:HIGH,MODERATE,LOW
1–Legalframework:HIGH
The legal framework is not well defined. It mentions volunteers, foresees them as part of the UnifiedEmergencySystem,butdoesnotprovideaclearenvironmentordefinitionforthevolunteers.Atthetimebeing(July2015),ageneralLawonvolunteering isundergoingParliamentaryrevision.However,thisLawdoesn’tdepictthefigureofthevolunteerwithintheNationalCivilProtectionSystem.Asoundframeworkshouldtakeintoconsiderationalltheareasofinterventionofavolunteerandofthevolunteerorganizationbothincrisisandinpeacetime.
It is recommended to adopt the “Law on volunteerism” and to develop a thematic legal frameworkaddressingroles,duties,responsibilitiesandthecommand&controlchainwithincivilprotectionactivitiesforbothvolunteersandvolunteerorganizations.
2–Institutionalsetup:MODERATE
VolunteersareawidespreadrealityinGeorgia.Theyarepresentinallmunicipalities;theyaretrainedandaccounted by the EMA and other institutional stakeholders in civil protection activities. However, an in-depthassessmentontheroleandlong-termstrategyofexistingrealitiesisnecessarytoidentifyprecisely
9DataprovidedbyEMA.10IFRC,GeorgiaAnnualReport2014.
77
thenationalpanoramaof civilprotectionvolunteerism.Attentionshouldbepaid to fullyunderstand thereal extent of the Georgian volunteering system by accounting: both registered and unregisteredvolunteers,itsmeans(i.e.availablevehicles,tools,equipment,etc.)andcapacities(i.e.areasofexcellence,curricula of volunteers, training history, etc.). Having thus mapped the institutional panorama ofvolunteering inGeorgia,EMA -andallother relevant stakeholders - shouldelaboratea roadmap for theinclusionandmanagementofalltheactorsactiveinthenationalcivilprotectionvolunteeringsystem.
It is recommended to assess in depth the National Civil Protection Volunteering System. As part of theassessment, thenational roadmap for the inclusionandmanagementofall thevolunteersandvolunteerorganizationsactivelyparticipatinginthenationalcivilprotectionvolunteeringsystemshouldbeelaborated.
3–Networkingwithvolunteerorganisations:MODERATE
The institutionalization of volunteerswithin theUnified EmergencyManagement System has included avolunteeringoperativenetworkcomposedbydifferentlegalentities,NGOsandcitizensincivilprotectionactivities. Volunteers are partially accounted for by organizations (i.e. the Red Cross has an updateddatabase of volunteers) but a general overview is required tomap, assess gaps and to identify areas ofsupport of volunteer organizations to the civil protection system. This could be done by developing aNationalDatabaseofVolunteersandVolunteerOrganizationsandbydefiningproceduresfor itsconstantupdate.
It is recommended to develop a National Database, subdivided at regional levels, of volunteers andvolunteerorganizationsaccounting forpersonal skillsandavailableequipment.Coupled to theDatabase,proceduresforitsupdatemustbealsodevelopedinordertograntitssustainability.
4–Protectionofvolunteers:MODERATE
The draft Law on Voluntarism foresees Georgian hosting organizations as main responsible bodies forinstituting a safe and righteousworking environment. Such environmentwill empower both the role ofvolunteersandvolunteeringorganizations. Infact,thekeystoneofanefficientvolunteeringsystemistheperceptionofprotectionandtutelagethatvolunteershavebytheinstitutions/organisationsthattheyserve.
It is recommendedthat the finalversionof thedraftLawonvoluntarism includeexplicitly the instituteofinsuranceforvolunteers.
5–Fundingofvolunteerorganisations:HIGH
Sustainabilityofthevolunteeringsystemismainlygrantedbyinternationalcooperationandprojects.Thereare nowell-defined budgetary lines sustaining activities and costs related to volunteers or to volunteerorganizations.Thisimpedesthedevelopmentofnationwidestandardisedproceduresfortheameliorationof specific civil protection objectives (i.e. supporting municipalities in the development of emergencyplanning,developingriskawarenesscampaigns,etc.).Additionally,italsofundamentaltobuildcapacities,
78
within the volunteer organization, for the development of self-financing strategies. This is ever moreimpellingifcombinedwiththepreviousrecommendationforimposingadditionalprotectionforvolunteersandthusadditionalcostsuponthesystem.
It is recommended to empower Volunteer Organizations in the field of self-financing by providing anadequatecapacity-buildingplanaddressingfinancialsustainabilityofVolunteeringOrganizations.
9.4 RoadMap
Topic Recommendation Who How When
Legalframework Adoptlawonvolunteerism
CabinetofMinisters
Parliament
AdoptionoftheLawbytheParliament
2015-2016
LegalframeworkDevelopa
thematiclegalframework
CrisisManagement
Centre
EMA
VolunteeringOrganizations
1)Studyandtestingof
lows/SOPsbyrelevant
stakeholders.
2)Promulgationofadditionalthematic
laws/SOPsforCivilProtectionVolunteers.
2016-2020
Institutionalsetup
AssessmentofVolunteeringSystemand
developmentofthematicroadmap
EMA(coordinator)
VolunteerOrganizations
VolunteerGroups
1)Establishmentofaworking
group
2)Assessment
3)DevelopmentofRoadmap
2016-2017
Institutionalsetup
AssessmentofVolunteeringSystemand
developmentofthematicroadmap
EMA(coordinator)
VolunteerOrganizations
RoadmapondevelopmentofaNationalCivilProtection
VolunteeringSystem
2017-2018
79
VolunteerGroups
Institutionalsetup
Monitoringtheeffectivenessofthedevelopedstandardand
SOPs
EMA
GeorgianRedCross
Evaluationsurvey 2016-2020
NetworkingwithVolunteer
Organizations
Assessinglacksandidentifyingareasofsupportofvolunteerorganizations
EMA
VolunteerOrganizations
Developingnationaldatabaseandproceduresforitsupdate.
2016-2017
Protectionofvolunteers
Insuranceforvolunteers
CabinetofMinisters
Parliament
IncludinginsuranceinthedraftLawof
Voluntarismanditsapproval
2015-2016
Fundingofvolunteer
organizations
Adoptionofstrategiestosustainthe
developmentofvoluntarism
EMA
VolunteerOrganizations
DevelopmentofacapacitybuildingplaninthefieldofVolunteer
Organizationself-financing.
2016-2020
80
10 RaisingAwarenessaboutDisastersKeyAssessorsPPRDEast2Expert AntoninPetrCountryThematicFocalPoint LelaElizbarashviliChaptervalidatedby OtarKereselidze
CountryAdvisoryGroup
10.1 Legalandinstitutionalframework
AsstipulatedbytheLawonCivilSecurityNo.2467-II's,Art32and33from29May2014theresponsibilityforraisingawarenessaboutdisasterlieswiththeEmergencyManagementAgencyofGeorgia(EMA)whichworksverycloselywiththeMinistryofEducationandScience(MoES).
10.2 CurrentstatusofpracticesandareaofexcellenceThesurveyonraisingawarenessaboutdisasters,whichwasconducted throughaquestionnaire, showedthat specific strategy doesn’t exist, but communication and population awareness issues of emergencymanagementareregulatedbytheLawonCivilSecurity(articles32and33).
AtthemeetingwiththeMoES,itwasexplainedthattheactivitiesonraisingawarenessaboutdisastersareintegral part of regular education in Georgia andMoES is responsible for this programme. Disaster RiskReduction (DRR) isobligatorypartofnationalcurriculumfrom2010whenGeorgia togetherwithUNICEFconducted a DIPECHO project on mainstreaming DRR into education system. There is one DRR relatedsubject in each semester and MoES issues textbooks and books for teachers. In addition to classicalteachingmethods,theyuseanothermethods,e.g.computereducationalgamesforprimarylevel(grade1to 6) or practical trainings. Recently, the MoES acknowledged the importance of the DRR, so theyintroducedanewlargeprogrammeinwhichDRRbecamea“mainstreamsubject”:forgrade3and4,thesubject iscalled“Meandsociety”,grade5and6–“Ourregion”andfromgrade7up,theDRR isspreadacrossmoresubjects–civileducation,historyandgeography.
Inadditiontotheregulareducation,theEMAtogetherwithMoESorganiseanotheractivities-simulationexercisesatschools,kindergartensandineducationalinstitutionsforpeoplewithlimitedphysicalabilities,summercampsandYoungRescuers’Clubandaninternationalsummercamps.
TheEMAexpressed thathasnopreviousexperience fromworkingwith the JournalistNetwork (JN) thatwasdevelopedduringthePPRDEastphase1.
According to the information provided through the questionnaire, there were no national disasterawarenesscampaignsorganisedsincetheendofthePPRDEastPhase1.
EMAproposedfollowingtopicsthatthePPRDEast2shouldfocuson:
81
• Toorganizetrainingforstaffthatisresponsibleforrelationswithmedia;and
• Toorganizeaspecialhigh-levelmediapolicytrainingfordecisionmakers.
10.3 FindingsandRecommendations
DespiteofthequitedetaileddescriptionofresponsibilitiesfordisastersawarenessraisinginArt32and33of the Law on Civil Security and very well developed educational system, based on the feedback EMAprovided through the questionnaire, there is no national strategy/policywhichwould govern the raisingawareness about disasters. Therefore, it should be the priority to start drafting the national strategy assoughtbytheSendaiFrameworkforDisasterRiskReduction2015-2030.
Anotherareathatafocusshouldbeputonistheareaofnationaldisasterawarenesscampaignsorganisedin the occasion of significant days (e.g. International Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) Day or national CivilProtection Day). Planning and organisation of the national disaster awareness campaigns should beincludedasanintegralpartofthenationalstrategyforraisingawarenessaboutdisasters.
10.4 RoadMap
The roadmapproposes theprioritizationof the recommendations, timeframe for their implementationsandresponsibilitiesoftheinvolvedinterlocutors.
Activity1.1–Formationofaninter-ministerialworkinggroupfordraftingthenationalstrategyforraisingawarenessaboutdisasters
Responsibility:EMA
Timeframe:byFebruary2016
Support:PPRDEast2Programme
Activity1.2– Inventoryofexistingdocumentsrelatedtothedevelopmentofthenationalstrategyandanalysisofexistingsystem/procedures/divisionofresponsibilitiesintheareaofraisingawarenessaboutdisasters
Responsibility:nationalstrategydraftinggroup
Timeframe:byJune2016
Support:EMAandPPRDEast2Programme
Activity1.3–Seriesofdraftingmeetingstodevelopadraftofthenationalstrategyforraisingawarenessaboutdisasters
82
Responsibility:nationalstrategydraftinggroup
Timeframe:byDecember2016
Support:EMAandPPRDEast2Programme
Activity 1.4 – Legal endorsement of the draft of the national strategy for raising awareness aboutdisasters
Responsibility:EMA
Timeframe:byApril2017
Support: all national interlocutors active in raising awareness about disasters and participating in thedraftingprocessandPPRDEast2
Activity 1.5 – Development of action plan for implementation of the national strategy for raisingawarenessaboutdisasters
Responsibility:allnationalinterlocutorsactiveinraisingawarenessaboutdisasters
Timeframe:byAugust2017
Support:PPRDEast2
Activity1.6–Implementationofthenationalstrategyforraisingawarenessaboutdisasters
Responsibility:allnationalinterlocutorsactiveinraisingawarenessaboutdisasters
Timeframe:fromSeptember2017
Support:PPRDEast2(tilltheendoftheProgramme).
83
11 DataandinformationsharingandINSPIREDirective
KeyAssessorsPPRDEast2Expert RobertoRudariCountryThematicFocalPoint VakhtangGloveliChaptervalidatedby CountryAdvisoryGroup
11.1 Legalandinstitutionalframework
TheGeorgia–EUAssociationAgreementandActionPlan foresees theapproximation to theEU INSPIREDirectiveasoneof thepriorities.Asaresultof that theActionPlan forCreationofNationalSpatialDataInfrastructure (NSDI) for "Digital Georgia" has been launched under the coordination of theMinistry ofJustice(MoJ).TheprojecthasbeendevelopedwiththeassistanceofAustrianexperts.Thegoalistocreatea unified data infrastructure to help manage the issues related to environment, disaster prevention,agriculture,anddefenceandtoensureefficientoperationofinfrastructureprojects,emergencysituations,communicationandnavigationsystems.Theprojecthas the supportof theDataExchangeAgency (DEA)andEUTwinningProject-“StrengtheningE-governanceinGeorgia".
UndertheresolutionoftheGeorgianGovernment,theStateCommissionhasbeenestablishedtosupervisedevelopmentoftheNSDI.TheCommissionassignedtheNationalAgencyofPublicRegistry(NAPR)oftheMinistryofJusticetomanageandcoordinatetheNSDIdevelopment.
GeorgiaisthefirstcountryintheSouthCaucasusregiontobeginthedevelopmentoftheNSDIcomplyingwithEuropeanstandards.
11.2 CurrentstatusofpracticesandareaofexcellenceAsalreadystatedGeorgiaisundertakingaquitestrongactiontoapproximatetotheEUINSPIREDirective.Specifically,GeorgiahasdesignedaPublicAdministrationReformRoadMap.Thisroadmaphasamongstitscritical points the creation of a National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) compliant with the INSPIREprinciples.TheNSDIActionPlanaimsatfirstattheinvolvementandawarenessoftargetgroupsandotherstakeholders in the process of setting up and development of national spatial data infrastructure, as aresultofactivitiesimplementedwithinlong-termstrategicplan.DuringtheassessmentmissionallentitiesinterviewedwhereawareoftheNSDIStrategy,itsgoalsanditstiming.
AsasecondsteptheActionPlanputsforwardthedevelopmentofaharmonizedregulatorybaserelatedtothe topicofNSDI, compatiblewithEuropeanstandards inGeorgia.The firstversionof regulatoryLawofNationalSpatialDataInfrastructureofGeorgiashouldbeapprovedattheendof2015.
84
National standards, technical specification and regulations for collecting and maintenance of basicgeographicdata,compatiblewithEuropeanstandards(INSPIRE)havebeendefinedalready.
11.3 FindingsandRecommendations
NEEDOFIMPROVEMENTCLASSIFICATION:HIGH,MODERATE,LOW
1–TranspositionofEUINSPIREDirectiveintonationallaw:LOW
Aclearplan is there toapproximate to theEU INSPIREDirectiveasdetailed in thePublicAdministrationReformRoadMap.
2-DevelopmentofNSDIstrategy:LOW
AnNSDIStrategyisalreadydevelopedandapprovedasdiscussedinprevioussections.
3–Institutionalsetup:LOW
The institutional coordination and involvement has already begunpromotedbyNARP. The awareness israised among all contributing institutions, but still the implementation of the NSDI Strategy need to beproperlyputinplace.
4-DataSharing:LOW
AdatasharingpolicyisidentifiedintheNSDIStrategyandrelatedactionplan.
Thereisasetofactionsalreadyidentifiedintheactionplanthatremaintobeproperlytackledinordertohaveasuccessfulactionplanandcanwellrepresenttherecommendationsofthepresentanalysis:
• The need to create a metadata national profile for documenting spatial data and e-services,creation of metadata, compatible with European Standard (INSPIRE) in order to develop asystematizedandstandardizedmetadatacatalogue;
• ThedesignandimplementationofaNationalGeoportalforsharingspatialdata.InthissenseERRAshould be considered as a pilot, as ERRA should be in any case interoperablewith theNationalGeoportal.
• Aproperlong-termtrainingstrategydevelopedfortheGeorgianUniversities;
• TheneedofcontinuousprofessionaldevelopmentcoursesfortechnicalgroupssetuponsectorialandmunicipallevelwithintheGovernmentalinstitutions.
85
11.4 RoadMap
Topic Recommendation Who How When
NationalMetadataProfile
DevelopingaproperNationalmetadataProfileandaNationalMetadataCatalogue
NAPR(coordinator)
NAPRledconsultationwiththedifferent
ministriesinvolvedine-Servicesandgeospatialdata
provision
end2016
Data-SharingPlatform
DevelopmentofaNationalGeoportal
NAPR(coordinator)
Externalconsultancy/internalNAPR
capacity
end2016
EducationandTraining
Long-termtrainingforGeorgianUniversities
NAPR(coordinator)
Developingatrainingoftrainers
programmecoordinatedat
differentlevelsandacrossdifferent
sectors
end2016
EducationandTraining
Professionaldevelopmentcoursesfor
technicalgroups
NAPR(coordinator)
Establishingtrainingunitswithinthe
Governmentalinstitutions
2016-2017
86
12 ERRAKeyAssessors
PPRDEast2Experts RobertoRudariPaoloCampanella
CountryThematicFocalPoint VakhtangGloveliChaptervalidatedby CountryAdvisoryGroup
12.1 Institutionalframework
GeorgiahasaclearplanthatforeseestheestablishmentofaNationalSDIandaNationalGeoportaltostoreallofficialgeospatial information inan INSPIREcompliantmode.Asaresultofthat,Georgian investmentwillgonaturallyinthatreference–touseGeoportalalsoforthestorageofdatarelatedtodisasters.ERRAneedstobecastinsuchframeworkandaninvestmentinfullinteroperabilitywiththeNationalGeoportalneedstobedone.TheSDIframeworkwillbringanSDIinfrastructuresharedbythedifferentMinistriesandthatneedstobe interfacedwithERRA.TheNSDIactionplanwillalsodefineanationalmetadataprofile,andconsistencyoftheMikamoduleofERRAtosupportsuchprofileneedtobeguaranteed.
InteroperabilityandrelationswiththeWeb-AtlasderivingfromtheMATRAprojectandcurrentlyhostedatCENNareanecessarydiscussionwhenthenewinstallationofERRAwilltakeplaceintheNEA,astheywillreceivealsothemandatetohosttheWeb-Atlas.
12.2 CurrentstatusofInstallationsandUseGeorgiahascurrentlyoneinstallationoftheERRAplatform.TheinstallationisintheEMAintheMinistryofInternal Affairs on the local server. This installation is discontinuously utilized. Specific agreements havebeenreachedtoinstallasecondERRA/publicserverintheNationalEnvironmentalAgency(NEA)underthecoordinationofHeadoftheInformationTechnologydivisionofNEA.
Inthisconfiguration,theinstallationintheEMAwillbeonaprivatenetwork,whiletheoneintheNEAwillbeonapublicnetworksotoguaranteeaccessibilitytoselectedlayersatnationalandregionallevel.
Access to the main regional ERRA portal has been granted. Although the use of ERRA has beendiscontinuousatEMA,theplatformwasusedtoaccessalsoinformationfromotherPartnerCountries.
Metadatation has not been properly tackled yet even ifmetadata of already produced layers has beenconsulted. The catalogue functionality in ERRA has been used to link other availableWebMap Service(WMS).
TheQ-GISpluginofERRAhasneverbeenusedaswellastheVulnerabilityandtheCriticalAssetModules.Themobileappisnotusedsofar.
87
12.3 FindingsandRecommendations
1–Installation
ERRAshouldbereachableoutsidetheprivatenetworkofMIAandalsoshouldbeusedbyotherinstitutionsinvolvedinDRM.
RecommendationistospeedupwiththesecondinstallationatNEAthatwillserveasapublicERRAnode.
2–UseinEmergencyandStrategicPlanning
Uptonow,themainuseridentifiedistheEMAinitsroleofcoordinatingbody.EMAisalsoinchargeoftheriskassessmentwiththehelpofthecompetentinstitutions(e.g.theMinistryofEnvironmentandNaturalResourcesProtectionfortheproductionofhazardinformationtobetranslatedintoriskbyEMA).
Recommendation is towidenthediscussionontheERRAutilitytoother institutions involved inDRAandDRMstartingfromNEAandSSCMCthatshouldadoptatoolforinformationcoordination,visualisationandsharing.
3-Mainstreamingwithothernationalinitiatives
ANSDIisabouttobeestablishedinGeorgiaandthiswillhaveaninvestmentinaNationalGeoportalthatshouldguarantyinter-institutionaldataexchange.UptonowseveralsoftwaretoolsareinuseinGeorgianinstitutions,manyofwhichareWeb-basedasERRA(e.g.,EMAmaintainsanERRA installationandhas inparallelaGeonodedatabasemaintained;NEAwillmaintaintheWebAtlasofnaturalrisk implementedintheMATRAProject;SSCMCisplanningtohaveonehelpingtheirmandate insupportoftheiroperationalroom).
Inthiscontext,itisrecommendedtochoseareferencetoolatfirst.Inasecondphase,ifspecialusecasesdevelopmentisneededforaninstitutionandthereforeadifferenttoolwouldbeneeded,suchtoolshouldguaranteefullcompliancewiththeNationalGeoportal.ThiscanbethecaseofERRAinthecaseofdisasterrelateddataandofriskassessmentdataspecifically.
4-SupportofDLDCollectionandvisualization
Georgia,asdiscussedintheDLDsection,shouldinvest inapropercentralisedIT infrastructuretocollect,storeandmanagedisasterlossdata.
In this context, it is recommended to develop a disaster loss data module in ERRA that helps thereorganizationsuggestedintheDLDsection.
5-DatasharinginsideGeorgia
88
AlthoughGeorgian Institution arewell aware of the importance of data sharing on the context of DRR,thereisstillapoorlycoordinatedstrategyofdatasharingatnationallevel,especiallytothewiderpublic.
Itisrecommendedtodefineadatasharingpolicythatincludesrulesfortheinformationsharing,especiallywiththewiderpublic,incompliancewiththeguidelinessetbytheNSDIproject.
6-DatasharingintheENPIEastRegion
IntermsofdatasharingpoliciesintheENPIEastRegiontherearenospecificissuesraisedbytheGeorgianinstitutionsandincaseoffloodssomeframeworkofinternationaldatasharingexists.
Recommendation is to define a data sharing policy that includes rules for the information sharing atinternationallevel.
12.4 RoadMap
Topic Recommendation Who How When
InstallationCompletingthe
secondinstallationatNEA
NEAincoordinationwith
EMA
Installingthesystemwiththesupportofthe
ERRAPPRDEast2expert
end2015
UseinEmergencyandStrategicPlanning
Identifyingproperreferenceusersfor
ERRAinContingencyPlanningand
StrategicPlanning
EMAinconsultationwithSSCMCandallinstitutionsinvolved
EMAtoidentifythereferenceinstitutionsandstartaWGontheERRAusecases
definition
mid2016
Mainstreamingwithother
Nationalinitiatives
Mainstreamingofthealready
presenteffortsintoasinglePlatform
EMAincoordinationwith
NAPR
EstablishingaworkinggrouponthetechnicallevelincludingallthestakeholderswiththesupportofPPRDEast2IT
expert
Startearly2016
SupportofDLDCollectionandvisualization
DevelopmentofERRADLDModule
EMA/SSCMCEstablishinga
technicalworkinggroupincludingall
Mid2016
89
thestakeholders
DatasharinginsideGeorgia
Definitionofrulesfortheinformationsharing,especiallywiththewider
public
EMA(coordinator)
Establishingaworkinggroupincludingallthestakeholders
Early2017
DatasharingintheENPIEastRegion
Clarifythetypeofinformationand
thelevelofaggregationforthe
datasharing
EMA
Establishingaworkinggroupincludingallthestakeholders
early2017
90
13 Annexes
Annex1-HNSSOPtemplate
Annex2–ListofInterlocutors
top related