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