Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia’s Coastal Zone Vulnerability Assessment and Adaptation Options November 2020 © 2020 The World Bank 1818 H Street NW, Washington DC 20433 Telephone: 202-473-1000; Internet: www.worldbank.org Some rights reserved This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of the Executive Directors of The World Bank or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Rights and Permissions The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because The World Bank encourages dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for noncommercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. Attribution Please cite the work as follows: “World Bank. 2020. Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia’s Coastal Zone: Vulnerability Assessment and Adaptation Options. © World Bank.” All queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to World Bank Publications, The World Bank Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA; fax: 202-522-2625; e-mail: pubrights@worldbank.org. Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 i Table of Contents Abbreviations vi Executive Summary 1 Chapter 1. The Study: Purpose, Objectives, Methodology and Limitations 5 1.1. Purposes 5 1.2. Objectives 5 1.3. Methodology 6 1.4. Limitations 9 Chapter 2. Overview of Georgia’s Coastal Zone Economic Sectors 11 2.1. Introduction 11 2.2. Agriculture and Forestry 12 2.3. Tourism 13 2.4. Commercial ports and oil terminals 13 2.5. Energy 15 Chapter 3. Georgia’s Coastal Climate and Climate Change Impacts 17 3.1. Climate baseline 17 3.2. Climate future projections 17 3.3. Key climate trends and direct consequences 19 Chapter 4. Cost of Environmental Degradation and Key Climate Risks for Coastal Georgia 26 4.1. Introduction 26 4.2. Flooding 27 4.3. Coastal erosion 31 4.4. Soil and forest degradation 31 4.5. Pollution 32 Chapter 5. Climate Impacts on Coastal Georgia Economic Sectors, Health and Infrastructure and Adaptation Options 33 5.1. Introduction 33 5.2. Agriculture and forestry 38 5.3. Commercial ports and oil terminals 42 5.4. Tourism 45 5.5. Energy and transport 48 5.6. Health 52 5.7. Coastal Infrastructure 53 5.8. Water supply, wastewater/stormwater and solid waste management infrastructures 58 Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 ii Chapter 6. Conclusions and Recommendations 62 6.1. Introduction 62 6.2. Information recommendations 63 6.3. Institutional recommendations 67 6.4. Investment recommendations 70 References 71 Bibliography 73 Appendix 77 CoED Study Limitations 77 CoED Study’s Valuation Methods 78 Listof Tables Table 1: Summary of Recommendations and Key Actions 4 Table 2: Prerequisites for recommended actions 8 Table 3: Population in the Coastal Municipalities as at the End of 2017 11 Table 4: Estimated CoED For coastal Georgia, 2017 26 Table 5: Qualitative assessment of climate change on CoED 27 Table 6: Components of the Blue Economy 34 Table 7: How green and grey infrastructure can work together 36 2 Table 8: Change of area (km ) of the Agro-Climatic Zone C3 attributed to climate change 38 Table 9: Recommendations on adaptation measures from Agrinap which are relevant to coastal Georgia 41 Table 10: Expected Impacts of climate change on the operation of Georgia’s sea-ports 42 Table 11: Adaptation options for commercial ports 44 Table 12: Expected impact of climate change on Georgia’s costal tourism sector 46 Table 13: Examples of climate stressors on transmission lines 49 Table 14: Examples of structural and functional adaptation measures on transmission lines 51 Table 15: Main types of coast protection grey infrastructures currently applied in Georgia 56 Table 16: Examples of adaptation measures that could be used to reduce vulnerabilities of Georgia’s coastal infrastructures 57 Table 17: Adaptation measures to reduce vulnerabilities of water supply, wastewater/stormwater, and solid waste management infrastructures in coastal Georgia 61 Table 18: Environmental Degradation evaluation methods used in CoED study 78 List of Maps Map 1: Geographic scope, coastal zone municipalities 7 Map 2: Rural population in Georgia’s coastal zone 12 Map 3: Potential hydropower plants 15 Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 iii List of Figures Figure 1: Flow chart of phases of the study 6 Figure 2: Cargo ship in port of Poti 14 Figure 3: Enguri Dam, located along the Enguri River in the province of Samegrelo-Semo Svaneti 16 Figure 4: Projected change in monthly temperature for Batumi for 2040-2059 20 Figure 5: Presumable dynamics of glaciation decrease in the Enguri River Basin 20 Figure 6: Projected change of the Kolkheti area due to SLR under different global temperature rise scenario 24 Figure 7: Projected change of the Batumi and Kobuleti area due to SLR under different global temperature rise scenario 24 Figure 8: Estimated annual CoED for coastal Georgia by category, 2017 27 Figure 9: Overview of the most frequent natural disasters in Georgia 28 Figure 10: Flooding In Batumi, August 10, 2018 29 Figure 11: Current hazard level of fluvial and pluvial flooding in Adjara, Guria, and Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti. 29 Figure 12: 2030 Flood hazard simulation for coastal Georgia 30 Figure 13: Map of 59 countries that included coastal ecosystems and the coastal zone in adaptation strategies in their NDCS 34 Figure 14: Map of 28 countries that included a reference to coastal wetlands in terms of mitigation in their NDCs 36 Figure 15: The links between ecosystem services and human well-being 37 Figure 16: Brown Marmorated Stink Bug 40 Figure 17: Gabion baskets arranged to protect towers of Batumi-Akhaltsikhe transmission line from erosion 51 Figure 18: Rock berm arranged along the coast 54 Figure 19: Terraced sea wall at Kobuleti beach 54 Figure 20: Coast protection created with reinforced concrete blocks 55 Figure 21: Scheme of submerged breakwater structure arranged with tetrapods (T.T.P.) 55 Figure 22: Coast extension over three years after placement of underwater coast protection structure 56 Figure 23: Seaside waste dump near Batumi 60 Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 iv Acknowledgements This report was prepared by a World Bank team led by Darejan Kapanadze (Senior Environmental Specialist) and Paola Agostini (Lead Natural Resources Management Specialist) and composed of international consultants Sergio Vallesi (water and ecosystems), Elena Strukova Golub (economics) and local consultants George Shikhashvili (architecture and urban development), Ivan Vashakmadze (cultural heritage and tourism), Maka Murvanidze (entomology and biosecurity), Gigia Aleksidze (climate change and GIS), Irakli Ugulava (GIS), Mamuka Gvilava (marine and coastal zone management), Mamuka Makhatadze (economics) and Mamuka Berdzenishvili (tourism). Special thanks to the following peer reviewers for their valuable contributions to the report: Junu Shrestha (Senior Environmental Specialist), Darshani De Silva (Senior Environmental Specialist), Stavros Papageorgiou (Senior Natural Resources Management Specialist), Banu Setlur (Senior Environmental Specialist), Tuukka Castren (Senior Forestry Specialist) and Milen Dyoulgerov (Senior Environmental Specialist). The team would like to thank Ms. Kseniya Lvovsky, Practice Manager, Environment, Natural Resources and Blue Economy for the Europe and Central Asia Region, and Sebastian-A Molineus, Regional Director, South Caucuses Country Unit, who provided valuable support to the team. The team is grateful for the information provided by officials of the Ministry of Environmental Protection and Agriculture and its National Environmental Agency, the Ministry of Economy and Sustainable Development, government of the Autonomous Republic of Adjara, regional governments of Guria and Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti, and the Batumi Municipality City Council. The Team also wishes to thank all stakeholders from governmental, non-governmental, academic and private institutions who participated in two workshops dedicated to discussing climate change impacts on coastal infrastructure and tourism, held in the seaside town of Batumi in 2018 and in the capital city of Tbilisi in 2020. The report was funded by the Nationally Determined Contribution Support Facility (NDC-SF). Front cover photo: view from botanical garden on sea bay and railroad (Source: Shutterstock/photo by Tamar Shikhinashvili) Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 v Abbreviations BBSEA Blueing the Black Sea Program BEDF Blue Economy Development Framework BMSB Brown Marmorated Stink Bug BSEC Black Sea Economic Cooperation CCRA Climate Change Risk Assessment CoED Cost of Environmental Degradation CWR Crop Wild Relatives CZ-NAP Coastal Zone National Adaptation Plan DCFTA Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement EIEC Environmental Information and Education Center GCM Global Climate Model GDP Gross Domestic Product GEF Global Environmental Facility GLOF Glacial Lake Outburst Flood ICCAMGR Institutionalization of Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation in Georgian Regions ICTP International Center for Theoretical Physics ICZM Integrated Coastal Zone Management IPCC International Panel of Climate Change MEPA Ministry of Environmental Protection and Agriculture MRDI Ministry of Regional Development and Infrastructure MW Mega Watt NALAG National Association of Local Authorities of Georgia NDC Nationally Determined Contribution NDC-SF Nationally Determined Contribution Support Facility PPP Private Public Partnership RCM Regional Climate Model RCP Representative Concentration Pathways SLR Sea Level Rise SSP Shared Socioeconomic Pathways TCIS Tourism Climatic Indices UNDP United Nations Development Programme UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change USAID United Sates Agency of International Development US$ United States Dollar WRI World Resource Institute WB World Bank WBG World Bank Group Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 vi Executive Summary The context The Georgian coast has a total population of 554,700 and generates about 20% of the country’s GDP (US$ 2.14 billion). The coastal zone spans north to south from the mouth of the river Psou to the Sarpi settlement, extending over a coastline area of about 120 km. This zone is home to valuable river deltas, coastal crops, forestry, commercial activities, and has the potential to expand the tourism industry, which is already quite well-established. The recent rapid growth of tourism facilities along the southern part of the coast accelerated the competition for different demands on land, water, and other natural resources: man-made barriers along rivers induced changes in the patterns of freshwater flows; while glacier thaws and rainwater collection has contributed to a significant reduction in the important ecosystem service of sediment transport and deposition, thereby augmenting coastal retreat. Moreover, climate change and disaster risks are exacerbating these threats. According to the first Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) 1, the cost of the coastline adaptation program is estimated at about US$ 600 million. If no adaptation measures are taken, the estimated losses to the tourism sector will reach about US$ 2 billion by 2030. The current 2015 Intended NDC indicates that priority will be given to integrated coastal zone planning in order to reduce the vulnerability of highly exposed communities, businesses and infrastructure in coastal Georgia. However, the government will also need to finalize the new NDC, currently under preparation, and bridge financial, knowledge, and institutional gaps. Georgia is fully committed to address the climate risks the coastal zone faces, and to develop economic planning to go in hand with its adaptation and mitigation efforts. Georgia’s Black Sea coastal zone faces multiple adverse risks including changes in precipitation patterns, which will result in increased magnitude and frequency of drought and flooding events; damage to housing and infrastructure in the coastal area as a result of rising sea levels and coastal erosion; the spread of plant pests and diseases affecting farming and forestry and rising temperatures and increasing heat waves. In addition to these climate risks, policymakers have to address the challenge of the COVID-19 pandemic. Sectors such as tourism, maritime transport, and fisheries have been affected globally as a result of the disruption of supply side capacity, restricted access, falling demand and the increased number of sanitary and regulatory measures which have undermined these sectors’ operations. Georgia’s government should seize the opportunity to support an economic recovery that maximises job creation and directs investment to climate adaptation and the transition to a more sustainable and climate resilient future throughout Georgia’s Black Sea coastal zone. 1 The NDC, also referred to as Intended nationally determined contribution (MEPA_A, 2015), is elaborated by the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources Protection of Georgia in close cooperation with the key ministries and other relevant stakeholders, Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 1 Purpose and methodology The higher-level purpose of this study is to provide information to be used to raise the ambition of Georgia’s NDCs and to consider adaptation targets for the Black Sea coast of Georgia. The study also aims to highlight how supporting a Blue Economy could accelerate the implementation of adaptation measures required to reduce climate risks and contribute towards the region’s socioeconomic development and environmental conservation. This work has been financed by the Nationally Determined Contribution Support Facility (NDC- SF). The methodology used in the present study consists of five main steps. These are: Define the geographic scope; Review available Climate Change projections; Identify key climate risks and vulnerabilities for coastal Georgia; Assess the impact of climate change on economic sectors and infrastructure, and possible adaptation options; and prioritise initial recommendations and key climate adaptation actions. The Climate Change projections reviewed in this document are based on available models which were undertaken for the Third National Communication to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) (MEPA_B, 2015), while the Fourth National Communication to the UNFCCC is currently being prepared by Georgia’s government. One limitation of this report is that it makes simplified assumptions about climate change projections for coastal Georgia, due to the lack of existing models at a regional level. The approach used in determining the key climate risks and vulnerabilities for the coastal zone was based on an assessment of the cost of environmental degradation for coastal Georgia. The Cost of Environmental Degradation (CoED) assessment, which represents a technical background paper for the ‘Georgia: Towards Green and Resilient Growth’ report and for this NDC-SF funded work, highlights the main sources of environmental degradation for Georgia’s coastal zone. These include flooding (coastal, urban and fluvial), coastal erosion, soil and forest degradation, and water pollution (WBG 2020). The approach used to evaluate the various impacts on coastal Georgia consisted of a qualitative analysis and expert input from international and local teams. This included an assessment of feasible adaptation options. Discussions with local experts and government agencies were also carried out in order to gain further details of vulnerable areas and evaluate both the potential for specific adaptation measures to yield economic benefits as well as the feasibility and acceptability of these options. The input of Georgian knowledge to this process proved critical to ensure that the analyses were sound and that the project team did not overlook important adaptation actions. Using these findings, consultations with local government officials and local and international experts, initial recommendations required to address critical risks and vulnerabilities for coastal Georgia were identified. The report is organized in six chapters. Chapter one introduces the purpose, objectives, methodology, and limitations for the study. Chapter two provides an overview of Georgia’s coastal zone economic sectors, while Chapter three provides an overview of Georgia’s coastal climate and climate change impacts. Chapter four presents the priority risks for coastal Georgia, based on the existing cost of environmental degradation estimates and climate change projections. Chapter five discusses the impacts of Climate Change on Georgian coastal economic sectors, health and infrastructure, through the prism of the priority risks described in the previous chapter and presents a menu of adaptation options. Chapter six discusses the conclusions of the study and makes initial information, institutional, and investment recommendations, and key actions, including key actions required to implement climate adaptation on the ground. Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 2 Key findings As stated in Georgia’s second NDC document currently in draft, Georgia is renewing its commitment to study its adaptive capacity to climate change by mobilizing domestic and international resources for its most climate vulnerable sectors. These are: agriculture, forestry, human health, infrastructure, tourism, surface and ground water resources, mountain ecosystems and biodiversity. The Ministry of Environmental Protection and Agriculture of Georgia suggests the inclusion of coastal areas in the adaptation part of the revised NDC. There is a strong opportunity for Georgia to integrate the Black Sea into the country’s strategies for climate adaptation and mitigation. A Blue Economy approach maximises the socio-economic and environmental benefits generated by the coastal, marine, and maritime sectors, in an integrated and sustainable way, in order to better address the growing threats confronting the sea, particularly those posed by climate change. It also provides employment generation opportunities for coastal communities, reduce pressure on coastal and marine ecosystems, and enhance their productivity in a sustainable manner. Any adaptation to climate change action would also contribute to a post-COVID-19 economic recovery of coastal zone communities and businesses. Short-term employment opportunities can be generated through coastal restoration activities, for example from waste pick up, sustainable land management, and cash-for- work programs. Implementing on-the-ground climate adaptation measures in coastal Georgia would also represent a long-term investment that would contribute to “building back better” with more resilient infrastructure and assist the coastal sectors. The total cost of environmental degradation for the year 2017 estimated in the CoED report is about US$ 100 million per year (equivalent to about 4% of the annual GDP of the eight municipalities on the coast). From 2021 to 2025, the aggregated CoED could amount to US$ 500 million. This figure is probably underestimated, as some categories were not included in the CoED study due to data limitation. This value is also expected to be aggravated year by year by the effects of climate change, as well by population and economic growth. Early actions to prepare communities, infrastructure and businesses for climate change and to enable them to adapt over time, is likely to cost significantly less than a rushed programme required to meet these objectives later, following years of inaction. The cost of climate adaptation is strictly dependent on the quality of the public policies that attempt to achieve it, which needs to involve the public sector, be based on cost-benefit analysis, and have clear regulatory systems and processes. Climate adaptation investments involve the use of conventional grey infrastructure, as well as a menu of natural interventions, often referred to as green infrastructure. Integrating green and grey infrastructures provides an effective way of implementing climate adaptation measures on the ground, while producing lower cost, more resilient services, as well as socioeconomic and environmental co-benefits. Recommendations provided in this study aim to raise the level of urgency and awareness needed to reduce the impact of climate change on the coastal zone as well as the escalating cost of inaction. Recommendations are divided into three main categories: Information, Institutional, and Investment recommendations, in order to address data and knowledge gaps, policies and legislative gaps, and financial gaps respectively. For each recommendation, key climate adaptation actions are identified, based on considerations around institutional acceptance, financial feasibility, robustness against possible climate futures, cost-effectiveness and co- benefits (environmental and socioeconomic). These actions are intended to be implemented within a timeframe of one to three years. A summary table with recommended actions is provided below (Table 1). Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 3 Table 1: Summary of Recommendations and Key Actions Cat. Recommended actions No. RECOMMENDATION 1. R1 Improve the Climate Change planning process for coastal Georgia Action 1. Prepare a Climate Change Risk Assessment for Coastal Georgia R1A1 Information Action 2. Develop a One Map to assist the prioritization of required actions and dissemination R1A2 of key information Action 3. Improve the understanding of monitoring and accounting of ecosystem services for R1A3 climate adaption Action 4. Assess socioeconomic benefits of climate adaptation measures R1A4 RECOMMENDATION 2. Identify key knowledge gaps towards the preparation of a Blue Economy Development R2 Framework to support climate adaptation Action 1. Undertake an institutional, policy and legal gap analysis for the development of the R2A1 coastal, marine, and maritime sectors and inclusion of climate change adaptation RECOMMENDATION 3. R3 Prepare a Blue Economy Development Framework to support climate adaptation Institutional Action 1. Develop policy and plans to integrate the Blue Economy Development Framework R3A1 into costal Climate Change adaptation Action 2. Prepare an Integrated Coastal Zone Management Plan and Marine Spatial Plan that R3A2 supports climate adaptation Action 3. Develop policies and plans to promote the smart use of grey and green R3A3 infrastructure for Climate Adaptation of coastal Georgia RECOMMENDATION 4. R4 Allocate institutional responsibilities required to action climate adaptation plans Action 1. Allocate suitable responsibilities to integrate climate adaptation actions with Blue R4A1 Economy Development Framework RECOMMENDATION 5. R5 Undertake a Climate Adaptation Financial Business Plan for coastal Georgia Investment Action 1. Identify Private Public Partnership (PPP) opportunities to implement the Climate R5A1 Adaptation Financial Business Plan for coastal Georgia Action 2. Prioritize the most critical on the ground climate adaptation measures for coastal R5A2 Georgia and secure funds for fast implementation Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 4 Chapter 1. The Study: Purpose, Objectives, Methodology and Limitations 1.1. Purposes The high-level purpose of this study, which is financed by the Nationally Determined Contribution Support Facility (NDC-SF), is to support the implementation of the coastal zone related NDC targets with the integration of Blue Economy gains. Its findings are to be used to start raising the ambition of Georgia’s NDC and help define climate adaptation targets for the Black Sea Coast of Georgia. This information is to be used by public and private sector stakeholders to ensure that coastal climate risks and vulnerabilities are correctly assessed, and that an integrated coastal management development strategy is in place to protect communities, assets, and businesses (mainly tourism, commercial ports, and coastal agriculture), and for the preservation of coastal natural capital and biodiversity. The report presents key climate change risks that the coastal zone of Georgia faces today, and a list of initial recommendations and actions required to address climate risks and reduce associated information gaps, institutional gaps, and financial gaps. The study also aims to highlight how supporting a Blue Economy will accelerate the implementation of adaptation measures required to reduce climate risks and contribute towards the region’s socioeconomic development and environmental conservation. The information in this document is to support the Coastal Zone National Adaptation Plan (CZ-NAP), a first version of which was produced in early 2020 by local consultants with support of the WBG. The document also aims to unify the information learned as a result of strategies developed by coastal regions, such as the Development Strategies for Guria and Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti administrative regions (MRDI_A,B, 2013), the Climate Change Strategy of the Autonomous Republic of Adjara (UNDP, 2013), and the Samegrelo-Zemo Svantei Adaptation Strategy to Climate Change (UNDP, 2014). This report is also a key part of the World Bank Blueing the Black Sea Program (BBSEA), that is being developed in support of the Common Maritime Agenda, signed by all the countries of the Black Sea plus Moldova in May 2019. The initial step of building a coherent BBSEA Program focuses on the Pillar 1 “Save the Sea” that aims to reduce pollution in the Black Sea. Although the project, which will use the Global Environmental Facility (GEF) financing mechanism and will be executed by Black Sea Economic Cooperation (BSEC), will benefit all Black Sea countries, national deep dives will take place in four countries, including Georgia, Moldova, Turkey and Ukraine. The ambition of the program is then to progressively include all remaining Black Sea countries through additional resources. 1.2. Objectives The main objective of this study is to present the key impacts of climate change currently faced by the coastal zone of Georgia, which refers to the coastal municipalities located within the three regions under de facto jurisdiction of the Government of Georgia, as well as list the most urgent recommended actions required to boost climate adaptation in the short-term. The information is to be used by governmental agencies and municipalities for decision making purposes, and to ensure that coastal municipalities have the right policy Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 5 and implementation framework in place in order to plan for mid and long-term adaptation measures as well as to reduce coastal Georgia’s vulnerabilities to a changing climate. Another objective of the study is to increase stakeholders’ awareness of the threat of climate change on coastal Georgia and to foster mechanisms for cooperation between Georgia’s coastal regions and municipalities – as well as among neighbouring countries on the Black Sea ¬– in order to address the potential impact of climate change on the coastal zone. Implementing the recommendations in this report would enhance the current information systems for the various governments’ decision makers and secure a more robust and easily access repository for climate change and coastal threats information. This should also allow for a more comprehensive consultation process among stakeholders to ensure sufficient buy-in of future actions, in particular when it comes to the institutional, policy and legal changes required for the development of the coastal sectors and inclusion of climate change adaptation. 1.3. Methodology The study comprised the following five steps: Defining the geographic scope; Reviewing available Climate Change projections; Identifying the most critical risks and vulnerabilities; Assessing the impact on sectors and infrastructures, and potential adaptation options; Prioritising the recommended key actions. Discussions with local experts and government agencies were also carried out to gain further details of vulnerable areas, and to evaluate both the potential for specific adaptation strategies to yield economic benefits as well as the feasibility and acceptability of these options. The input of Georgian knowledge to this process proved critical to ensure that the qualitative analyses were reasonable and that the project team did not overlook important adaptation actions. The criteria used to evaluate the different adaptation options included institutional acceptance, financial feasibility, robustness against possible climate futures, cost-effectiveness and additional benefits (environmental and socioeconomic). The figure below shows a summary of the phases for the study, followed by a description of each individual step. Figure 1: Flow chart of phases of the study Defining the geographic scope Georgia, with an area of more than 69,800 square kilometres, has a highly diverse landscape, comprised of mountains, plateaus, lowland-plains, glaciers, wetlands and arid areas (semi-deserts), lakes and rivers. Climate change is causing a variety of effects in Georgia, which differ greatly depending on the region. In most cases the consequences of these changes occur in a different area to where they originate (e.g. the change of ice and snow melting patterns in mountainous regions is causing abrupt and severe flood events in Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 6 coastal areas). While addressing climate vulnerability requires a holistic approach at a national level, to ensure the right level of engagement, it is also essential to address climate vulnerability at a regional and local level. The Georgian coast, spanning north to south from the mouth of the river Psou to the Sarpi settlement, is divided into the Autonomous Republic of Abkhazeti (currently not under de facto jurisdiction of the Government of Georgia) and the regions of Adjara, Guria, and Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti. This study focuses on the impacts of climate change on all of the coastal municipalities located within the jurisdiction of the Government of Georgia: Khelvachauri, Batumi, and Kobuleti in Adjara, Ozurgeti and Lanchkhuti in Guria, and Poti, Khobi, and Zugdidi in Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti (Map 1). Map 1: Geographic scope, coastal zone municipalities Source: The World Bank Reviewing available climate change projections The official source of climate change predictions for Georgia is the Third National Communication to the UNFCCC. This document is based on climate change forecasts which were undertaken at the International Centre for Theoretical Physics using Regional Climate Models (ICTP, 2015). The model provides estimates, based on the IPCC A1B scenario 2, for the main climatic parameters such as temperature, precipitation, wind 2 The IPCC Al scenario family describes a 2100 future world with the following three groups of alternative directions of technological change: fossil intensive (AlFI), non-fossil energy sources (AIT), or a balance across all sources (A1B), where balanced is intended as not relying too heavily on one particular energy source. Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 7 and humidity as well as the seasonal and annual extreme climate indexes for the periods of 2021-50 and 2071- 2100 (the period of 1986-2010 being used as a baseline). This national-level information was used to extract data relevant to the coastal region and assess the implications for the focus area. Several additional sources of climate change information were also consulted, including the Georgian Road Map on Climate Change Adaptation report (USAID, 2016), the Climate Risk and Adaptation Country Profile for Georgia (WBG, 2019), and the Climate Change Knowledge Portal, an online platform developed by the WBG (Website 1). Identifying critical climate risks and vulnerabilities The methodology used in this report consisted of a review of the key environmental degradation factors affecting coastal Georgia, based on the recently completed World Bank report: The Cost of Coastal Zone Degradation in the Country of Georgia (WBG, 2020), hereinafter referred to as CoED. The information from the CoED study, which refers to a specific year only, 2017, was then used together with available climate change forecasts, in order to identify the most critical risks to Georgia’s coastal zone. Assessing the impact on economic sectors and infrastructure and investigating adaptation options A qualitative expert assessment of the expected future impact of climate change on economic sectors and adaptation options was undertaken. There were no quantitative assessments accomplished, due to the absence of data. Prioritising recommended actions Using the information obtained from the steps above, the prerequisites described in the following table, as well as consultations with government officials and local experts, the key adaptation actions required for addressing the impacts of climate change on coastal Georgia were selected. These actions are intended to be implemented within a timeframe of one to three years, as a more detailed level of planning for mid and long- term adaptation is foreseen in the Climate Adaptation Financial Business Plan. Recommended actions are divided in the three main categories using the 3 “I” approach: Information, Institutional, and Investment, in order to address information gaps, institutional policies and legislative gaps, and financial gaps respectively. Table 2: Prerequisites for recommended actions Prerequisites Details Institutional acceptance • Capacity to improve intersectoral and interagency coordination and planning Financial feasibility • Capacity to attract funds and innovative financial mechanisms Robustness against climate • Flexibility and resilience level change possible futures Cost-effectiveness, • Capacity to maximize ecosystem services (provisioning, regulating, and environmental and socio- cultural), and contribute to climate mitigation objectives economic benefits The terms “hazard”, “vulnerability”, “exposure”, impact” and “risk” used in this report are referred to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change glossary (IPCC, 2018) which are reported here: Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 8 ‘Hazard: The potential occurrence of a natural or human-induced physical event or trend that may cause loss of life, injury, or other health impacts, as well as damage and loss to property, infrastructure, livelihoods, service provision, ecosystems and environmental resources.’ ‘Vulnerability: The propensity or predisposition to be adversely affected. Vulnerability encompasses a variety of concepts and elements including sensitivity or susceptibility to harm and lack of capacity to cope and adapt.’ ‘Exposure: The presence of people; livelihoods; species or ecosystems; environmental functions, services, and resources; infrastructure; or economic, social, or cultural assets in places and settings that could be adversely affected. See also Hazard, Risk and Vulnerability.’ ‘Impacts: The consequences of realized risks on natural and human systems, where risks result from the interactions of climate-related hazards (including extreme weather and climate events), exposure, and vulnerability. Impacts generally refer to effects on lives; livelihoods; health and well-being; ecosystems and species; economic, social and cultural assets; services (including ecosystem services); and infrastructure. Impacts may be referred to as consequences or outcomes and can be adverse or beneficial.’ ‘Risk: The potential for adverse consequences where something of value is at stake and where the occurrence and degree of an outcome is uncertain. In the context of the assessment of climate impacts, the term risk is often used to refer to the potential for adverse consequences of a climate-related hazard, or of adaptation or mitigation responses to such a hazard, on lives, livelihoods, health and well-being, ecosystems and species, economic, social and cultural assets, services (including ecosystem services), and infrastructure. Risk results from the interaction of vulnerability (of the affected system), its exposure over time (to the hazard), as well as the (climate-related) hazard and the likelihood of its occurrence.’ 1.4. Limitations This study focuses on the impact of climate change solely on the coastal municipalities located within the jurisdiction of the Government of Georgia. The coastal zone within the Autonomous Republic of Abkhazeti, currently not under de facto jurisdiction of the Government of Georgia, is not included. This document focuses predominantly on coastal zone management and directly linked sectors, including coastal tourism, commercial ports, coastal agriculture, and coastal services and infrastructure. The study does not assess other aspects of the Blue Economy, such as fisheries, marine biotechnology, ocean energy, and seabed mining, since these sectors were not addressed in the CZ-NAP. The CoED report, which was used for assessing impacts on economy, is also lacking these sectors. Despite this limitation, this report includes considerations and recommendations that involve all aspects of the Blue Economy. The information on Climate Change used in this study is from the model used to prepare the Third National Communication to the UNFCCC. This model, based on methods for climate change forecasts undertaken at the International Centre for Theoretical Physics (refer to the methodology section and also section 3.1), is internationally recognised as valid; however, it is mainly undertaken at a national scale. This represents the main limitation for this study, since for developing an accurate adaptation plan for the coastal zone a regional or even local model would be beneficial. Risks identified in this report are those thought to have the potential for the most adverse climate-related hazards on lives, livelihoods, health and well-being, ecosystems and species, economic, social and cultural Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 9 assets, services (including ecosystem services), and infrastructure of coastal Georgia. However, without a suitable climate change risk assessment study for the coastal zone, this only represents a conservative approach. Finally, it should be noted that due to data limitations, the aforementioned CoED report focused mainly on the cost of environmental degradation from flooding, coastal erosion, landscape degradation, and pollution from waste. Therefore, the risks selection criteria used in this study should be considered only partly completed. To allow for more accurate future estimates, it is important that more systematic environmental degradation data collection is put in place by government agencies. Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 10 Chapter 2. Overview of Georgia’s Coastal Zone Economic Sectors 2.1. Introduction Recent reforms in economic management and governance, as well as newly introduced regulations, allowed Georgia to improve its global reputation and ease of doing business. Furthermore, the expansion of energy, tourism, and agribusiness is helping the country to gain further integration into regional and global economies. The 120km coastal zone considered for this study, which includes the municipalities of Khelvachauri, Batumi, Kobuleti, Ozurgeti, Lanchkhuti, Poti, Khobi, and Zugdidi, is home to 554,700 people (Table 3) and generates about 20% of the country’s GDP (or US$ 2.14 billion based on 2017 data, of which about US$ 1.14 billion is from Adjara, US$ 0.2 billion is from Guria, and US$ 0.8 billion is from Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti). This area is home to valuable river deltas, coastal crops, forestry and commercial activities, while its tourist industry, which is already quite well-established, has lots of potential for growth. Table 3: Population in the Coastal Municipalities as at the End of 2017 Municipality Density/Km2 Rural Urban Total Khelvachauri 147.20 51,800 0 51,800 City Batumi 2,549.00 0 160,800 160,800 Kobuleti 98.23 44,900 28,700 73,600 Ozurgeti 70.12 38,100 23,700 61,800 Lanchkhuti 55.23 24,700 6,400 31,100 City Poti 1,007.00 0 41,700 41,700 Khobi 42.06 25,700 4,000 29,700 Zugdidi 87.87 61,500 42,700 104,200 Total 246,700 308,000 554,700 Source: World Bank collection of development indicators, compiled from officially recognized sources Farming and forestry are the predominant primary sector activities in Coastal Georgia (there are some fishing activities, however these are not significant). There are no noteworthy activities in the secondary sector (manufacturing and processing of raw material) in coastal Georgia, however this is likely to change in the future. Georgia presents several opportunities in this sector, mainly due to competitive labour costs, low utility costs (up to 80% of power is generated via hydropower plants, leading to cheaper energy costs), and access to a market of 2.3 billion people, without customs duty. Investors, therefore, are starting to recognise the opportunities here. Tourism and commercial ports are the most significant tertiary sector activities. Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 11 2.2. Agriculture and Forestry Despite a recent decline in the economic importance of the agriculture sector, Georgia remains an agrarian society. Nearly half of the population living in coastal Georgia derive some form of income from agricultural activities. This is predominantly the case in Zugdidi (25%), Khelvachauri (21%) and Kobuleti (18%) municipalities (Map 2). Consequently, a large portion of the coastal zone population is highly vulnerable to any event that affects the performance of the agricultural sector. Map 2: Rural population in Georgia’s coastal zone Source: World Bank GIS operative Georgia’s coastal zone is home to a variety of agricultural activities. In particular, all of Georgia’s citrus production is based in this area. Citrus and tea production used to be leading industries in West Georgia. They both shrank as a result of the economic collapse and loss of export markets in the 1990s, however, recent signs of a comeback are visible. Citrus plantations are vulnerable to occasional frost in winter and especially to frosty days and hailstorms in early fall, when hanging fruits have not fully ripened. Agricultural produce from the coastal area, which includes high value crops such as berries, kiwi, persimmon, and bay leaf, is mainly exported to neighbouring foreign countries, such as Ukraine, Belarus, Russia, Kazakhstan and Armenia. Despite these commercial avenues, agriculture in the coastal zone is mostly dedicated to local consumption. As such, the yearly value of agricultural yield is difficult to estimate, with the exception of the main commercial crops. About 90% of the production value derives from activities taking Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 12 place in small-scale family operated agricultural holdings. In 2012, the average family holding had an area of 1.22ha and was fragmented in two or three land parcels of an average size of 0.45ha each. The areas are managed for subsistence farming, and when production is in excess of family needs, some yield is sold for income, but with little efficiency. To increase production access to larger markets, it is necessary for small- scale farmers to create organizations or cooperatives, however this is difficult without government support to assist with high transaction costs and legal support. Georgia’s forestry sector is undergoing a process of requalification after a long period of neglected and relatively weak forest governance. With more than 95% of forest cover consisting of natural forest, the country has great conservation potential as well as both timber and non-timber income potential. Historically, one of the main challenges for this sector was the poor enforcement of regulations for access by locals to source firewood for domestic consumption. A second common challenge is the weak monitoring system for forest management. This situation started to improve recently with the adoption of the new forest code (2020) and institutional reforms in the National Forestry Agency. About half of Georgia’s coastal zone is under Colchic forest cover which is characterized by temperate rainforests. Species composition varies depending on altitude. Georgia’s lowlands are characterized by mixed broadleaves and homogenic stands of chestnuts, and tertiary relic flora, including Zelkova carpinifolia, Diospiros lotus, Pinus pithyusa, Arbutus andrachne, and Staphilea colchica. Beech and spruce-fir is found at mid elevations, while oak, birch and beech are present at higher elevations, with the occasional presence of Rhododendron Caucasicum and subalpine meadows. 2.3. Tourism Tourism – in particular, coastal tourism in the Adjara region – is one of the fastest-growing industries in Georgia, and a driving force of the country’s economy. According to the World Travel and Tourism Council, in 2017, the direct contribution of travel and tourism to the country’s GDP was about 9.3% (overtaking agriculture, forestry and fishing which accounted for about 8.2% of GDP in the same year), and this rate is likely to increase to 10.5% by 2028. This sector is highly attractive (more than US$ 3 billion of annual revenue is generated through foreign tourism only), however the international tourism market is very competitive and all of the factors which influence growth need to be carefully considered for this sector to continue to grow. Visitors to coastal Georgia are attracted by seaside resorts and local cuisine, historic monuments and cultural diversity, as well as three national parks and two State nature reserves, which offer subtropical vegetation, wetlands, peat bogs, and rich biodiversity. Most tourism activity takes place by the seaside and during the summer season. This has led to booming construction activity in Batumi, Kobuleti and the southernmost part of Georgia’s coast (the Gonio and Sarpi settlements). The quality and duration of snow cover on the mountain slopes close to Adjara also provides an excellent tourism draw in winter months, which has led to the ongoing development of ski resort facilities. 2.4. Commercial ports and oil terminals There are four seaports operating on Georgia’s coast; these are the two trading ports of Batumi and Poti (Figure 2) and the two oil terminals of Supsa and Kulevi, with a total turnover potential of 50 million metric tons per year. Batumi and Poti ports are the gateways for international maritime trade for Georgia and the Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 13 neighbouring Armenia, while Supsa terminal is a strategic outlet for the oil carried from Azerbaijan by the BP- operated Western Route Export Pipeline. Based on 2017 data, the gross domestic product for the transportation and storage sector in Adjara and Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti was about US$ 65 million and US$ 187 million respectively. Figure 2: Cargo ship in port of Poti Source: dredgingtoday.com Development of a new deep-water cargo port in Anaklia is under consideration, while some preparatory work has already been started. The government wants to develop a world class port complex there and establish Anaklia as a focal point of trade to and from Central Asia and on the New Silk Road trade route between China and Europe. Specific strategies to achieve this relate to port operations, the strong alignment of cargo growth and profitability, marketing and sales, the utilization of Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement (DCFTA) and the Free Economic Zone. The new port is expected to provide reduced costs for users and, subsequently, to improve the economic opportunities domestically, regionally and internationally. According to Anaklia Deep Sea Port facility’s draft Master Plan, the port was supposed to be developed in nine phases between 2017 and 2069. The project has not commenced yet, as an anticipated investment deal failed, however other sources of funding are being considered. If the existing investment plan is followed, Phase 1 would create thousands of jobs and facilities capable of handling approximately 8 million tons of containerized cargo per annum. Anaklia would provide the port infrastructure and facilities to accommodate container vessels with cargo capacity up to 10,000 TEU. At present, in the absence of deep-water access, Georgia’s existing ports can only accommodate container vessels with cargo capacities up to 1,500 TEU. Port development will require the provision of associated facilities such as a new highway and rail access linking the port to existing road and rail systems, and an overhead power line connecting the port to the national grid. Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 14 The E-60 international highway enters Georgia from Azerbaijan in the East, passes through the capital city of Tbilisi and connects to the Poti seaport. This highway is part of the TRASECA corridor linking Western Europe and Central Asia, vital for transportation of oil and gas, as well as dry cargo and agricultural produce, which then gets exported to Ukraine, Belarus, Russia, Kazakhstan, Armenia, and other foreign countries. 2.5. Energy 82% of Georgia’s energy is generated at hydropower plants, with a total installed capacity of 2727MW (as at the end of 2015). In 2018, the county’s hydropower capacity was expanded, with the installations of two new plants: the 27 MW Kirnati power station and the 21 MW Old Energy power station, along with several smaller- scale projects. West Georgia is home to most of the country’s significant hydropower generating facilities, including Enguri hydropower plant, the country’s largest, which has the world’s fourth highest concrete arch dam with a height of 271 meters, located along the Enguri River which discharges into the Black Sea near Anaklia (Figure 3), as well as the recently built Adjaristskali hydropower cascade in Adjara. At first glance, hydropower electricity generation appears not to be directly linked with climate adaptation of coastal Georgia. However, as discussed in the section on coastal erosion, by impounding a free-flowing river, a dam causes a significant alteration of the river’s natural sediment load. Over time this causes significant deprivation of natural beach-forming sediment along the coast, leading to coastal erosion. Hence, the presence of dams is assessed as part of this study. The government plans to further expand this capacity, with a portfolio of assets at the planning stage. This includes the 433MW Namakhvani project being developed by the privately held Clean Energy Group Georgia which, when complete, promises to raise electricity generation mix in the country by 15% (Website 2). Several more hydropower generating plants are being considered or planned in the Black Sea basin of Georgia, including at Khudoni and Nenskra in Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti. The Ministry of Energy prepared a map showing the hydropower potential for the country (Map 3). The study included identification of gross theoretical hydropower potential (all identified potential, regardless of construction costs, environmental restrictions and already developed hydropower plants), and the actual hydropower potential represented in the map (which excludes expensive and unfeasible projects, projects within national parks, and potential that has already been developed, and amounts to about 30 TWh). The Adjara region in particular has a great hydropower potential. Adjara’s connection to the national grid is already being strengthened by the ongoing construction of high- voltage overhead transmission lines connecting the port city of Batumi to Akhaltsikhe in the Samtskhe- Javakheti region. This is likely to turn Batumi into a significant node for exporting power to Turkey. However, development in this region of more hydropower dams without a suitable sediment bypass programme is likely to aggravate the already existing issues of erosion along the coast Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 15 Figure 3: Enguri Dam, located along the Enguri River in the province of Samegrelo-Semo Svaneti Source: Andrei Bortnikau / shutterstock.com Map 3: Potential hydropower plants Source: former Ministry of Energy, available at http://energy.gov.ge/investor.php?lang=eng&id_pages=79 Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 16 Chapter 3. Georgia’s Coastal Climate and Climate Change Impacts 3.1. Climate baseline With an area of about 69,800km2, Georgia is characterized by sharp vertical zoning, primarily within the Great Caucasus mountains in the north, and Small (or Lesser) Caucasus, in the south. Two-thirds of the country is mountainous and 20% of the country is located at 2,000m or more above sea level. The Alpine mountain regions are generally cold, with average temperatures of between 2°–10°C and annual precipitation between 1200–2000mm. The climate in the eastern lowlands is typically dry and subtropical, with annual temperatures between 11-13°C and yearly rainfall between 400–600mm. Unlike the rest of the country, coastal Georgia is predominantly characterized by lowlands, with the exception of some Small Caucasus ranges in the municipalities of Ozurgeti Kobuleti and Khelvachauri. Georgia’s coastal zone’s climate considerably differs from the rest of the country. The mitigating effect of the Black Sea provides a humid and subtropical climate, with mild winters, hot summers, and relatively abundant and well distributed rainfall. Average annual temperature ranges between 14°C to 15°C and has risen about 0.3°C (compared to 0.4-0.5°C in eastern areas) since the 1960s. Annual rainfall is between 1,500mm and 2,500mm, and heavy precipitation can occur year-round, unlike the rest of the country where it is experienced mostly in the spring to summer months, with the greatest amount of rainfall in May and June. 3.2. Climate future projections Climate change creates a series of hazards which have interrelated socioeconomic and environmental consequences. The concept of climate change risk is used to represent the combination of consequences that climate hazards could cause, and their likelihood of occurrence. To make meaningful and proactive responses, decision-makers require a formal analysis of climate change risks and of the level of exposure for communities, infrastructure, and businesses – referred to as climate vulnerabilities – as well as the options for addressing identified risks under societal and financial constraints. In order to make decisions, decision-makers, including institutions, communities and businesses, also require the identification of new opportunities which arise from climate change. The process of identifying and classifying the main risks, vulnerabilities and opportunities from the current and predicted impacts of climate change, hereafter referred to as Climate Change Risk Assessment (CCRA), is challenged by the momentous spatial and temporal dynamics of climate change, and is heavily affected by societal preferences and values, and by the interaction with other risk factors (Adger, W.N., 2018). As a consequence, it is crucial to acknowledge that much uncertainty in climate change assessments is inevitable, and to treat this not as a barrier but as a source of knowledge which can influence decision strategies (Lewandowsky, S., 2015). Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 17 As outlined in the European Environment Agency’s 2016 report 3, at a minimum, the CCRA should provide: a) A trend of various climate variables (based on a range of different climate scenarios, i.e. the Representative Concentration Pathways, RCPs 4); b) Expected direct and indirect impact threats; opportunities (by identifying the most relevant hazards as well as the areas of the country, region or city that are at most risk given an overlay of spatial distribution of total population, vulnerable populations, economic activities and economic value); c) A timescale, with differentiated impacts expected in the short-term (2020s), medium-term (2050s), and long-term (2080s/2100); d) An indication on the level of confidence (e.g. high, medium, low) for such impacts, (with a view of facilitating the decision-making process given the degree of uncertainty); e) An assessment of the socio-economic development and other non-climatic factors (e.g. demographic change, use of resources, market trends, and other factors that have a significant influence on a vulnerability to climate change). The findings from the CCRA process are also used to develop a National Action Plan, as a way to improve the country’s preparedness and adaptive capacity, and to update the Nationally Determined Contribution. To maximise the efficiency and effectiveness of adaptation measures, climate strategies also proactively integrate strategies for managing disasters (i.e. earthquakes and epidemics). Several countries have formally prepared their first CCRA and are in the process of reviewing them. The government of Georgia, with support from United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), runs a US$ 70 million programme which includes country-wide assessment of CCRA, and the development of respective adaptation measures and multi-hazard early warning systems. The results of the CCRA assessments are usually shared through the communications to the UNFCCC. While most of these studies present an excellent source of climate change information, they were predominantly undertaken at national level, with limited assessments for the coastal region, which is recognised as a critical area for the country. An exception is the Adjara region, which is covered in the third communication to UNFCCC, including information about risks, vulnerabilities and opportunities. The document also includes a number of generic considerations for the coastal zone, which are presented below. A coastal specific CCRA would represent a single and comprehensive repository for climate change risks, vulnerabilities and opportunities for the coastal zone. The CCRA assessments undertaken by the Government of Georgia, with the support of the UNPD, were based on Regional Climate Models (RCMs), known as RegCM4. These were developed at the International Centre for Theoretical Physics (ICTP, 2015), in preparation of the Third National Communication to the secretariat of UNFCC. The process was undertaken using the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology – Earth System Model, which is common usage (website 4 and 5). RegCM4, which allowed researchers to downscale available Global Climate Models (GCM) from a resolution of 100km down to a resolution of about 10-15km, was used to estimate the adverse impacts that Climate Change is posing on Georgia’s economy and ecosystems and the threat it poses to the country’s sustainable 3 Climate change, impacts and vulnerability in Europe 2016, available at https://climate-adapt.eea.europa.eu/metadata/publications/climate-change impacts-and-vulnerability-in-europe-2016/climate-change-impacts-and-vulnerabilities-2016-thal17001enn.pdf 4 RCPs, adopted by the IPCC for its fifth Assessment Report to cover the range of anthropogenic climate forcing in the 21st century, reach radiative forcing levels of 2.6, 4.5, 6.0, and 8.5 Watts per square meter (W/m2), corresponding to concentrations of 450, 650, 850, and 1370 ppm CO2eq, respectively, in 2100. Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 18 development. Downscaling a GCM to regional conditions/topography is a standard method used for assessing climate change scenarios at regional level. To prepare this study, the following additional sources of climate change information were also reviewed. The Climate Risk and Adaptation Country Profile for Georgia (WBG, 2019) study utilises the work of Elizbarashvili, which applies statistical methods to climate observations for the region to make predictions utilising the suggested change-scenarios provided by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Elizbarashvili, M., et al., 2017). The Georgian Road Map on Climate Change Adaptation (USAID, 2016) was prepared with a contribution of the National Association of Local Authorities of Georgia (NALAG) for the Institutionalization of Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation in Georgian Regions (ICCAMGR) project. Forecasts provided in this document cover the entire territory of Georgia and are derived based on the ESPON Climate, a European project that looks at the Climate Change and Territorial Effects on Regions and Local Economies in Europe. 3.3. Key climate trends and direct consequences Increase of temperature and melting of glaciers During the past 25 years, average annual temperature in West Georgia increased by 0.3°C, compared to 0.4- 0.5°C in the East Georgia. Maximal increase of average annual temperature between the periods of 1961-1985 and 1986-2010 in the coastal zone is recorded in the seaside town of Poti (6°C). Based on the RegCM4 modelling, the coastal area of the Autonomous Republic of Adjara is going to be one of the areas with the greatest degree of warming across Georgia (MEPA_B, 2015). Based on the modelling undertaken for the third communications to UNFCCC, by 2071-2100, the annual temperature in Batumi is likely to rise by 4.2°C. The same figure for Poti is estimated at 2.9°C. While Kutaisi has historically been the warmest point in Georgia, with an average annual temperature of 14.9°C, it is expected that by 2100, Batumi will be the warmest place in Georgia, with a predicted average annual temperature of 19.4°C. Summer temperatures in coastal Georgia are also expected to increase in a shorter timeframe, as shown in the following figure presented in the WB Climate Change Portal (Website 2), where an increase by 3°C, compared to 1986-2005, is expected in 2040-2059 (Figure 4). The same source indicates that summer temperatures in this area could increase by about 5°C and 6°C in 2060-2079 and 2080-2099 respectively (compared to 1986- 2005), which is even higher than RegCM4 predictions. The number of frosty days and nights in the coastal zone is expected to decrease, while the number of hot days, especially in summer and fall, is estimated to grow. Consequently, minimum temperatures are going to rise and so are maximum temperatures, but with a lesser intensity. Temperature and precipitation change in mountainous areas are also expected to have an impact on the coastal zone, especially in spring and summer. Depending on the abundancy of snowfall, rapid melting due to escalating temperatures is expected to have an effect on the lower sections of the catchment, including mudflows and flooding. This is also exacerbated by deforestation and land degradation on the catchments’ slopes. Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 19 Figure 4: Projected change in monthly temperature for Batumi for 2040-2059 Source: World Bank Climate Change Portal (Website 2) The increasing temperature in higher altitude regions is also driving the retreat of glaciers, which results in more severe water and sediment flows. Glaciers in the Greater Caucasus Mountains, comprising up to 0.4% of its territory, have a direct impact on the coastal zone. Due to climate change, these glaciers have been rapidly retreating over recent decades. Satellite imagery from 1985-2000 shows an average glacial retreat of eight meters per year in the central part of the Greater Caucasus, which drains down to the Black Sea. Furthermore, large glaciers are known to retreat at a higher speed than smaller ones. Based on the RegCM4 used for preparation of Georgia’s Third National Communication to UNFCCC, the forecasted increase of annual air temperature in the region of upper Svaneti will lead to 57% decrease of the glacier area in the Enguri River basin as compared to its current probable area (if no temperature increase was expected) by 2100 (Figure 5)). Stronger than regular spring flooding from rivers is also already experienced in the mountainous areas of Adjara. Furthermore, the over-saturation of upper layers of soil with the snowmelt water triggers further landslides and mudflows. Figure 5: Presumable dynamics of glaciation decrease in the Enguri River Basin Source: Based on the RegCM4 used for preparation of Georgia’s Third National Communication to UNFCCC Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 20 While glacier retreat carries multiple long-term risks, its immediate hydrological impacts include the decrease of glacier runoff and the formation of pro-glacier lakes. The comparison of satellite images taken in 1985 and 2000 showed that the number of pro-glacial lakes has increased by 50% and their area by 57%. As a result of melting glaciers, the level of water increases in lakes as does the risk of water breaking through the moraine debris containing the lake, causing disastrous flashes of downstream rivers (an event known as glacial lake outburst flood, or GLOF). Natural disasters such as these have started to occur in Georgia, including the July 2018 flood on the river Nenskra, in the Samgrelo-Zemo Saventi region. Change of precipitation patterns and increase of flooding, landslides and mudflows Comparison of annual precipitation data from the periods of 1956-1985 and 1986-2015 shows an increasing rainfall in the low-mountain zone of Svaneti and in the middle-mountain regions of Adjara, (except for the Goderdzi pass, where rainfall has decreased). A change of precipitation between the two thirty-year periods has also been observed in the city of Poti (11%), Kobuleti and Zugdidi (4%) 5. RegCM4 shows that annual precipitation growth is expected to continue in West Georgia until 2050, but is likely to decline after that, except in the Batumi area. The expected increase of precipitation in West Georgia, and in particular in the Adjara coastal zone, is significantly different to the rest of Georgia, where a significant decrease in precipitation is predicted by 2100. The number of days with extremely abundant precipitation is also likely to increase in West Georgia’s lowlands, including the coastal zone, while decreasing in mountainous areas. The duration of periods with and without precipitation is also expected to grow in the coastal zone, as well as the rest of the country (with the exception of parts of East Georgia, where dry periods are expected to increase the risk of droughts). Extended periods with high precipitation in West Georgia will likely increase the risk of floods and waterlogging. The majority of geological events take place in Georgia’s mountainous areas, which cover 71% of the country and where about 20% of the population lives. Two thirds of landslides recorded in the country happen in highland areas, while disasters such as mudflows, snow avalanches, glacier falls and transformed glacier flows are fully characteristic of mountainous regions. More than 80% of the victims and the economic damage caused by these types of disasters come from highland areas, which can result in the abandonment of mountain villages. Some of the coastal zone’s mountainous areas, particularly in Adjara, are also prone to a variety of erosion and geological activities which are worsening with climate change extremes, particularly high rainfall events and increasing periods between rain and no rain. An increased occurrence of landslides and slope failure has already been observed in various parts of the region. Heavy rainfall removes millions of cubic meters of fertile topsoil from the slopes, which is then carried by rivers, and ends up being deposited on the bottom of hydropower reservoirs or on the sea floor, in case of unfragmented rivers. The observed change of trends in precipitation pattern in coastal Georgia, including the growth of total annual volume as well as a change in yearly distribution, accounts for the increased rate of soil erosion by surface water. Because part of Georgia’s coastal zone lies below sea level and the ground water table is exceptionally high, particularly in areas of Kolkheti’s lowlands, waterlogging has been a historic issue. Settlements also suffer 5 Extracted from the draft 4th National Communication to UNFCCC Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 21 from malfunctioning storm water removal infrastructure. Ongoing changes in the pattern of precipitation contribute to the increased occurrence of waterlogging. Based on available climate projections, the forecast for 2020-2050 shows an annual precipitation growth of 0.4% within the coastal zone and 1.4-1.8% further inland, with the exception of a slight decrease by 0.1% around the Goderdzi pass. This suggests a likely intensification of flooding, soil erosion, waterlogging and landslides over time. Available data does not provide an estimation of the incremental effect of climate change on these impacts; however, the retreat of glaciers is expected to significantly exacerbate them. The risk of flooding in lowland areas is exacerbated by the extensive drainage of coastal wetlands that has taken place over the years, and which is also directly linked to coastal erosion, particularly in Poti. A campaign to eliminate wetlands in Georgia’s coastal zone was undertaken during the Soviet era in order to eradicate malaria and accommodate expanding agricultural areas. However, this intervention ignored the natural role of wetlands, such as absorbing slowing-down and retaining runoff water during floods, purifying freshwater and recharging aquifers, providing a barrier to penetration and soil saturation by sea water, providing a habitat for a number of endemic and endangered species, in particular migratory birds, etc. Sea level rise and increase of coastal erosion Sea Level Rise (SLR) is expected to exacerbate coastal erosion across most of coastal Georgia. However, SLR is not the only driver for changes in Georgia’s shoreline. Georgia’s coastline has undergone a severe geomorphological transformation over the course of the past few decades, predominantly due to public and private development projects, mainly commercial ports, oil terminals, coastal transport infrastructure, coastal erosion control measures, and hydropower dams. The design and construction of any large structure along the coast and across rivers – as well as the operation and maintenance of existing ones – requires integrated planning to ensure sustainable management of water flows and sediment loads as well as to mitigate the risk of dramatically altering natural beach-forming processes. The commercial ports of Batumi and Poti were built with limited planning and considerations of potential exacerbation of coastal erosion. This led not only to geomorphological consequences but also to ecological impacts (i.e. a decline in marine ecology). Maintenance of these ports, especially Poti, is a major challenge. Deposition of solid sediments in River Rioni’s underwater canyon stopped 70 years ago, when the Rioni estuary was moved 4km north of its natural location in order to control flooding, and large volumes of sediment started accumulating in the Poti port creating ongoing issues for the port infrastructure. A similar situation is taking place in the freight port located north of Poti. Due to the construction of port infrastructure, the Khobistskali River stopped delivering solid sediment to the south. On one hand, this caused intensive coastal erosion due to sediment hunger, while on the other hand, it caused an accumulation of sediment in the port area. The situation in Batumi Port is less serious, as no large river with considerable sediment volume flows into the sea in its immediate proximity. Special consideration is also required for the planned construction of the Anaklia Port, with a particular focus on reducing the impacts of downdrift erosion. In this regard, a new trial was recently undertaken. Special mitigation actions are also required to reduce the impact of coastal erosion associated with the construction of the port itself, as well as its associated facilities. The project will transform the small settlement of Anaklia into a much larger agglomeration of residential and transportation-related industrial Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 22 and trade facilities, requiring extensive earth works and sediment extraction on the sea floor, both along the coast, and along the Enguri river. Georgia’s coast has suffered over the years due to the use of beach and river deposits as construction material for infrastructure and buildings. It is estimated that more than 30 million m3 of sand and gravel was removed from Georgian beaches between 1945 and 1965 (Zenkovicha, 1987). This led to an extensive narrowing of the beaches, and in some cases, their complete loss. The situation got even more complicated as the Enguri, Rioni and Chorokhi rivers were dammed. Unless an effective and regularly operated bypass system is in place, the construction of large barriers across rivers (such as dams) results in a blockage, not only of the flow of water, but of sediments as well. This leads to an abrupt drop of material being naturally carried to the sea, thus depriving the coastline of natural beach- forming processes. Another factor that led to coastline changes is the arrangement of terrestrial and marine coastline protection infrastructure, and the artificial deposition of sediment along parts of the coast. For several years passive coastal protection interventions, such as groynes, were built on a per-needed basis to protect specific sectors of the coastline. This caused updrift sediment accumulation and downdrift erosion, leading to new erosion issues. As a consequence, the size of Georgian coastal erosion increased from 155km in 1961, to 183km in 1972, to 220km in 1981 (Zenkovicha, 1987). Other interventions that have had an impact on Georgia’s coastline include the connection of the Paliastomi freshwater lake to the sea with a canal that led to the formation of a strait and the complete salinization of the lake. The rapid expansion of tourism facilities along the southern part of the coast also contributed to coastal erosion issues. Poor planning and weak oversight led to the construction of a number of tourism-related buildings and infrastructure along already unstable coastal sections, which then required extra maintenance efforts to protect wrongly placed assets. Furthermore, the construction of these structures required the removal of large amounts of sediment from areas where sediment was already scarce. The intensification of storms is another factor exacerbating coastal instability, as it is associated with extreme meteomarine conditions, high winds, high waves and high-water levels. As discussed above, the response to coastal storm damage has mostly been reactive, and damaged buildings and assets have been protected by local authorities using basic measures which only stopped erosion locally and temporarily. In most cases, these local interventions led to an increase of the down-drift erosion of other sections of the coastline. A study undertaken by Deltares indicates that the observed variation of extreme wave conditions along the shore mainly relates to discontinuity in the bathymetry, for example in the presence of canyons and capes which determines local focussing and attenuation of wave energy. The effect of a difference in water levels, due to water level set-up during storms and sea level rises, also plays a critical role, particularly for larger waves with a return period equal to 50 and 100 years, resulting in increased damage. The incoming wind and wave direction also have a direct effect, as it determines the wave characteristics and associated destructive forces (Giardino, 2015). The Climate Change Strategy of Adjara, developed in 2013, reports a forecasted SLR rise of 2-3mm per year in this area, in conjunction with an increased occurrence of severe sea storms. The document also reports the structural weaknesses of the coastline near the city of Batumi. (UNDP, 2013). SLR is expected to further Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 23 deteriorate over the years, which can reach up to 12.6 mm/year relative SLR, the third highest in the Black Sea area (Tatui, 2019). The following image, produced by a local NGO using a web-based tool developed by Climate Central’s Program on Sea Level Rise (Website 3), shows SLR consequences for the coastline under various global temperature rise scenarios (Figure 6). The images suggest that part of the Kolkheti lowland (located in the northern part of Kobuleti municipality) and other low-lying coastal areas (along Kobuleti coast in particular) may be submerged by the rising sea under the 2.5C° warming scenario. Using the same tool, it is possible to see how other low- lying areas, including the city of Batumi, may be submerged under the 3.0C° scenario, unless major adaptation solutions are implemented (Figure 7). Figure 6: Projected change of the Kolkheti area due to SLR under different global temperature rise scenario Source: seeing.climatecentral.org Figure 7: Projected change of the Batumi and Kobuleti area due to SLR under different global temperature rise scenario Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 24 Source: seeing.climatecentral.org The Guria Regional Development Strategy 2014-2021 notes that the predicted SLR for the coastline in the Supsa-Natanebi region by 2030-2050 is 23cm. The area is also expected to experience increased flooding along the Supsa river. (MRDI_A, 2013) Increasing SLR is also expected to strongly impact the Poti area. This location, which is about 1.5-2.0m below sea level, is also particularly vulnerable to severe sea storms, which can cause an alteration of the coastline sedimentation patterns. The Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti Development Strategy 2014-2021 states that the delta of the river Rioni and the coastal zone of Samgrelo represent two of the most vulnerable areas in Georgia (MRDI_B, 2013). The Upper Svaneti Adaptation Strategy to Climate Change (UNDP, 2014), does not cover the coastal zone, however, it describes climate change risks in this area and the resulting strong implications for lowlands downstream of the Enguri river. The Strategy emphasized that the activation of geodynamic processes, the retreat of glaciers, and the alteration of Enguri river hydrology will have strong and direct impacts within the Enguri Delta and the coastal zone of Samegrelo. The presence of large coastal and river infrastructure, such as ports and dams, has a direct impact on Georgia’s coastal zone in terms of coastal erosion, mainly due to the alteration of sediment loads. This is going to be exacerbated by the construction of new infrastructure as well as by the impact of climate change. In terms of SLR – a climate change effect driven by warmer seawater temperatures and rapid melting of glaciers – observed monitoring indicates that SLR in Georgia is generally in line with global trends. According to the US Department of Commerce, the global mean water level in the ocean rose by 3.6mm per year between 2006 and 2015, which was 2.5 times the average rate of 1.4mm per year throughout most of the 20th century. This aligns somewhat with available records for Batumi and Poti. By the end of the 21st century, global mean sea level is expected to rise in the range of 0.3m to 1.2m above 2000 levels (USGCRP, 2017). If the possible Antarctic ice melt is also factored in, then the SLR may rise to 2.4m. While these estimates assume mostly linear relations between warming and sea level rise, a nonlinear response would lead to accelerated and amplified SLR. There is uncertainty around how soon the larger changes would begin; either within the next 50-150 years or in a multi-century timescale. The predictions by 2100, which also apply to Georgia, are about 2.9m, 4.7m, 6.4m, and 8.9m of expected SLR if global temperature rise is limited to 1.5C°, 2.0C°, 3.0C° (which is Georgia’s current NDC commitment) and greater than 4.0C° respectively. Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 25 Chapter 4. Cost of Environmental Degradation and Key Climate Risks for Coastal Georgia 4.1. Introduction Coastal Georgia faces various risks, including fluvial, pluvial and coastal floods, sea surges and coastal erosion, landslides and mudflows, heavy winds and storms. All of these risks, which are in part due to the area’s geomorphological nature and in part due to anthropogenic factors such as land use changes, are expected to be aggravated by climate change. The increased magnitude and occurrence of flooding events is also expected to exacerbate pollution in water and soil from sub-standard sewerage plants and waste sites in coastal Georgia. This highlights the need for continued investment in pollution control resilience measures, to address the country’s increasing vulnerabilities. In order to prioritize the most critical risks for coastal Georgia, those which are likely to severely impact the economy under future climate conditions, the findings of CoED report (WBG, 2020) were used. This study, which provides an estimate of the cost of environmental degradation for 2017, indicates that flooding is by far the greatest cost faced by coastal Georgia, followed by coastal erosion, agricultural soil and forest degradation, and pollution (Table 4 and Figure 8). Available data did not allow to the CoED report to make assessments specific to each region or municipality, however this information is still very useful for the development of specific adaptation measures. More details regarding the limitations of this study and a table presenting the methods used to assess the cost of the environmental degradations are included as an Appendix. Table 4: Estimated CoED For coastal Georgia, 2017 US$ Million, current prices, % of the annual GDP of the eight 2017 municipalities on the coast Flooding 82.5 3.5 Coastal Erosion 7.0 0.3 Agricultural Soil and Forest 3.27 - 6.85 0.14 – 0.29 Degradation Pollution 2.51 0.1 Source: World Bank estimates Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 26 Figure 8: Estimated annual CoED for coastal Georgia by category, 2017 Source: CoED report (WBG, 2020) Climate change is expected to aggravate the costs of environmental degradation, assuming the continuation of current government efforts. The following table, extracted from the CoED study, presents a qualitative assessment of climate change on cost of environmental degradation. A discussion on each category is presented below. Table 5: Qualitative assessment of climate change on CoED (+ increased cost, - decreased cost) Category Change Water pollution ++ Air pollution - Soil degradation ++ Forest degradation ++ Solid waste disposal - Fluvial floods ++ Coastal floods ++ Coastal erosion +++ Global impact from CO2 emission + Source: CoED report (WBG, 2020) 4.2. Flooding A recent study undertaken by the World Resources Institute indicates that by 2030 the number of people in the world impacted by riverine flooding will double, from 65 million to 132 million, while the number of people impacted by coastal flooding will rise from 7 million to 15 million. By 2050, the numbers will be even more catastrophic, with 191 million and 30 million people at risk of riverine and coastal flooding respectively (Figures Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 27 15 and 16). The study also highlights that every $1 spent on flood protection infrastructure in India could result in $248 in avoided damages (when moving from 11-year flood protection in 2010 to 25-year flood protection in 2050) and would reduce the likelihood of these areas being flooded by half. The World Resources Institute urges investment in flood protection infrastructure to save lives, create jobs and help economies (WRI, 2020). A previous study estimated human losses, economic damage and welfare losses due to river flooding under a range of socio-economic and global warming scenarios, assuming current vulnerability levels and in the absence of future adaptation. (Dottori, 2018). The study revealed that with global mean temperature increases of 1.5 °C, human losses could rise by 70–83%, damage by 160–240%, and welfare reduction between 0.23 and 0.29%. With temperature increases of 2°C, human losses could be 50% higher, economic damage could double, and welfare losses will rise to 0.4%. (Dottori, 2018). The Impact of further global warming is expected to become drastically higher, reiterating the urgency of increasing adaptation and mitigation efforts. Flooding is already the most frequent natural disaster in Georgia (Figure 9), and the most critical hazard for coastal municipalities featured in this study (Figures 10-11). Climate change is expected to further increase vulnerabilities to river and pluvial flooding, especially due to changes in precipitation patterns (Figure 12). The risk of coastal flooding is also expected to increase due to the intensification of sea level rises, tourism and other economic developments along the shoreline, and ongoing ground subsidence. Figure 9: Overview of the most frequent natural disasters in Georgia Source: climateknowledgeportal.worldbank.org Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 28 Figure 10: Flooding In Batumi, August 10, 2018 Source: Photo by press office of the Government of the Autonomous Republic of Adjara, available at https://agenda.ge/en/news/2019/2963 Figure 11: Current hazard level of fluvial and pluvial flooding in Adjara, Guria, and Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti. Source: thinkhazard.org Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 29 Figure 12: 2030 Flood hazard simulation for coastal Georgia Source: WRI Aqueduct Flood Analyser Based on the results from the CoED report, the estimated cost to society from fluvial/pluvial floods and coastal floods that occurred in coastal Georgia in 2017 was about US$ 55.5 million and US$ 27 million respectively. Together they represent the bulk of the total cost of environmental degradation for the year in question, at US$ 82.5 million/year, or about US$ 150 per capita and nearly 3.5% of the annual GDP of the eight municipalities on the coast. As risk increases, the cost from damages is also likely to escalate. For fluvial floods, an example for a first level of approximation of projected costs is provided, based on the same method used in the CoED report. The Aqueduct flood analyser 6 is used to estimate the Annual Expected Affected GDP by 2030 due to a pessimistic climate outlook for the coastal municipality of Zugdidi, which is representative of coastal Georgia, assuming a two-year flood protection system is in place. This is around US$ 20 million, which is twice what was estimated for 2017 in the CoED report. Applying the same flood damage functions which were used for the CoED study (damage function of about 0.66%, assuming a flood water depth of 1.5 meters), the impact on GDP for the municipality of Zugdidi therefore rises to about US$ 13.2 million or US$ 128 per 103,000 population of Zugdidi municipality. The same estimations on per capita basis have then been applied for each person in the coastal zone (about 555,000 people in 2017) for lost GDP; so, the total cost of fluvial floods to the population of coastal Georgia is about US$ 71 million annually. 6 https://floods.wri.org Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 30 4.3. Coastal erosion 24% of coastal zones globally are eroding at rates exceeding 0.5m per year (Luijendijk et al., 2018). If uncontrolled, ongoing coastline erosion leads to extensive damage of natural features and infrastructure, with severe economic repercussions, especially in countries where most of the economic activity takes place close to the shoreline, such as in parts of coastal Georgia. As mentioned earlier, Georgia’s coast has suffered significantly because of the ongoing use of beach deposits as construction material for infrastructure and buildings, as well the extensive damming of rivers which halts the natural sediment flow. The CoED study estimates that the total cost from environmental degradation due to sediment deprivation is about US$ 7 million annually (2017 base year), or US$ 12.6 per capita, equivalent to about 0.29% of the annual GDP of the eight municipalities on the coast (WBG, 2020). This yearly cost is expected to escalate with the effects of climate change, especially due to rising sea levels which will exacerbate the eroding action of waves and currents on the coastline. Currently there is not sufficient data to estimate the incremental cost of climate change in terms of coastal erosion. The ongoing retreat of glaciers will most likely play a critical role in terms increasing the ingress of sediments in Georgia’s river systems. However, the presence of existing dams will prevent this additional natural beach-forming material from reaching the seashore. Moreover, the construction of several new dams which are planned by the government, will lead to the further deprivation of natural beach-forming sediments. Consequently, the total cost from environmental degradation due to sediment deprivation, which includes the opportunity cost of alternative use of volume used for artificial nourishment, is expected to increase. This is likely to have a significant impact on the development of tourism, which thrives on the quality and size of stable sandy beaches. 4.4. Soil and forest degradation The draft 2020 CoED study estimates an annual absolute cost of agricultural soil degradation for 2017 of about US$ 1.17-2.35 million/year. The study also presents estimates of annual costs due to forest degradation and deforestation, which range from a minimum of US$ 2.1 million/year to a maximum of US$ 4.5 million/year. Extreme meteorological events associated with climate change, such as heavy rain, wind, and drought, all cause soil erosion and soil fertility loss. Animal husbandry also has the same negative effect on topsoil, mostly due to vegetation removal and compaction of soil micro-structure, which inhibits aeration and leads to further erosion. This mostly affects the interior parts of coastal Georgia resulting in extensive damage to farmland and forestry. Forests are also at risk due to poor enforcement of regulations for accessing firewood for domestic consumption, and ineffective forest management monitoring systems. Climate change is also likely to improve conditions for pests and diseases. A quantitative estimate included in the CoED report estimates a yearly revenue of about US$ 1.8 million for the three main crops (tangerine, tea and hazelnuts) of the 8 coastal municipalities which were the focus of the study. In terms of qualitative assessment, it is expected that conditions for pests will improve and this will bring about a higher vulnerability of agricultural and timber yield. The expected impact is therefore quite negative for both. Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 31 4.5. Pollution Waste Pollution. The CoED study estimates that the cost of waste pollution in coastal Georgia in 2017 was about US$ 2.51 million. In the presence of stronger rainfall, the effect of waste pollution is expected to increase, due to the increased likelihood of contaminant leaching from disposal sites due to water runoff and a higher water table. However, this tendency should be moderated by the improved practices of waste disposal and waste treatment to which the government has already committed. The CoED study did not estimate the cost of air and water pollution due to a lack of suitable data. Due to current commitments and ongoing efforts by the government, it is likely that indoor air pollution from wood combustion will fall. However, due to higher temperatures and the higher frequency of rain and floods, and in the absence of protective investments, the deterioration of water quality will likely increase with climate change. This is expected to impact the health and wellbeing of communities and tourism. Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 32 Chapter 5. Climate Impacts on Coastal Georgia Economic Sectors, Health and Infrastructure and Adaptation Options 5.1. Introduction This chapter looks at the impact of climate change on Georgia’s coastal economic sectors, health, and infrastructure through the lenses of the key climate change risks identified in the previous chapter (flooding, coastal erosion, soil and forest degradation, and pollution). Sectors include agriculture and forestry, energy and transport, tourism, and commercial ports and oil terminals. Infrastructure includes coastal infrastructure, water and waste infrastructure. For each category, a selection of adaptation measures is also presented. This process, which would assist local authorities in narrowing down potential options and developing a detailed plan of action to achieve adaptation on the ground, supports the preparation of initial recommendations and key actions presented in the next chapter. Adaptation options can range from actions that build adaptive capacity (e.g. knowledge creation and sharing information, creating supportive institutional framework) or establish management systems and supportive mechanisms (e.g. better land management planning, insurance mechanisms) to adaptation actions implemented on the ground, often referred to as ‘grey’ (infrastructure) or ‘green’ (ecosystem-based) measures. This step facilitates an exploration of potential adaptation options and helps to identify relevant recommendations and actions, which are presented in the next chapter. Climate adaptation options presented in this section also take into consideration the opportunities that result from integrating a Blue Economy approach into climate change adaptation. The concept of a Blue Economy, which encompasses all coastal and maritime economic activities, was introduced to promote the sustainable use of coastal and marine resources for economic growth, improved livelihoods, and jobs while preserving the health of ecosystems. A Blue Economy approach strives to maximise the socio-economic and environmental benefits generated by coastal, marine, and maritime activities, including food production and job creation, in an integrated and sustainable way, in order to better address the growing threats now confronting the sea, particularly those posed by climate change. The development of a Blue Economy represents a strategic direction to address the impact of climate change on coastal Georgia, as it would help accelerate the transition to climate-smart businesses and generate funds to implement on-the-ground climate adaptation measures, as well support the government’s climate mitigation objectives. A Blue Economy will also provide employment generation opportunities for coastal communities, reduce pressure on coastal and marine ecosystems and at the same time enhance their productivity in a sustainable manner. Because of its great potential to support climate adaptation and mitigation efforts, the Blue Economy has become a public policy aspiration of several countries around the world. The following figure shows the 59 countries that have already included coastal ecosystems and the coastal zone in their NDC adaptation strategies. Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 33 Figure 13: Map of 59 countries that included coastal ecosystems and the coastal zone in adaptation strategies in their NDCS Source: Coastal blue carbon ecosystems. Opportunities for Nationally Determined Contributions (Herr, 2016) The following table presents a description of the main components of the Blue Economy, with an indication of related business sectors and drivers of growth. Table 6: Components of the Blue Economy Type of Activity Type of Activity Type of Activity Type of Activity Shipping and shipbuilding • Growth in seaborne trade; transport demand; international regulations; maritime transport Transport and trade Maritime transport industries (shipbuilding, scrapping, registration, seafaring, port Commerce and operations, etc.) trade in and around the Ports and related services oceans National planning ministries and • Coastal urbanization, national Coastal development departments, private regulations sector National tourism Tourism and authorities, private sector, • Global growth of tourism recreation other relevant sectors Carbon sequestration Blue carbon • Climate mitigation Habitat protection, Indirect Coastal Protection • Resilient growth restoration contribution to economic Waste Disposal for Assimilation of nutrients, activities and • Wastewater Management land-based industry solid waste environments Existence of Protection of species, • Conservation biodiversity habitats Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 34 Type of Activity Type of Activity Type of Activity Type of Activity Extraction of minerals (Seabed) mining • Demand for minerals Extraction and use of marine Extraction of • Demand for (alternative) energy Oil and gas non- living energy sources sources resources (non- renewable Freshwater Desalination • Demand for freshwater generation Fisheries (primary fish • Demand for food and nutrition, production) especially protein Secondary fisheries and related activities (e.g., processing, net and gear making, ice production and supply, boat • Demand for food and nutrition, construction and especially protein maintenance, manufacturing of fish- Seafood harvesting processing equipment, packaging, marketing and Harvesting and distribution) trade of marine living resources • Demand for food and nutrition, Trade of seafood products especially protein Trade of non-edible • Demand for cosmetic, pet, and seafood products pharmaceutical products • Demand for food and nutrition, Aquaculture especially protein Use of marine living resources for • R&D and usage for health care, Marine biotechnology and pharmaceutical cosmetic, enzyme, nutraceutical, bioprospecting products and and other industries chemical application Use of renewable non- exhaustible Generation of • Demand for (alternative) energy natural forces (off-shore) renewable Renewables sources (wind, wave, energy and tidal energy) Source: World Bank (The Potential of the Blue Economy, 2017) The portfolio of climate adaptation measures includes the conservation and restoration of existing natural features – for example coastal wetlands – as well as the construction of new infrastructure that mimics the ecological function of nature to reduce the impact of climate change. These types of solutions, often referred to as nature-based solutions, require the recognition of the roles that natural ecosystems can play in climate change mitigation and adaptation. The following figure shows the 28 countries that included a reference to coastal wetlands in terms of mitigation in their NDCs. Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 35 Figure 14: Map of 28 countries that included a reference to coastal wetlands in terms of mitigation in their NDCs Source: Coastal blue carbon ecosystems. Opportunities for Nationally Determined Contributions (Herr, 2016) While the conservation of existing natural features and the implementation of new nature-based features provide a strong opportunity for climate adaptation, certain sectors require the integration of conventional measures, often referred to as grey infrastructure. Integrating nature into mainstream climate adaptation infrastructure can produce lower cost and more resilient services, as well as deliver environmental and socioeconomic benefits. The following table presents some examples of how green and grey infrastructure can work together for effective climate adaptation solutions. Table 7: How green and grey infrastructure can work together Grey infrastructure Examples of green infrastructure components and their Service components function Watersheds: Improve source water quality and thereby reduce treatment requirements Water supply and Reservoirs, treatment sanitation plants, pipe network Wetlands: Filter wastewater effluent and thereby reduce wastewater treatment requirements Reservoirs and power Watersheds: Reduce sediment inflows and extend life of Hydropower plants reservoirs and power plants Coastal flood Embankments, groynes, Mangrove forests: Decrease wave energy and storm surges protection sluice gates and thereby reduce embankment requirements Urban flood Storm drains, pumps, Urban flood retention areas: Store storm water and thereby management outfalls reduce drain and pump requirements Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 36 River flood Embankments, sluice River floodplains: Store flood waters and thereby reduce management gates, pump stations embankment requirements Barrages/dams, Agriculture irrigation Agricultural soils: Increase soil water storage capacity and irrigation and drainage and drainage reduce irrigation requirements canals Source: World Bank (Integrating Green and Grey guide) The integration of green and grey infrastructure would help improve the health and wellbeing of Georgia’s coastal communities. Natural systems such as forests, floodplains, and soils can contribute to the provision of sustainable, clean, and reliable resources (e.g. water and food supply) and provide regulation against extreme events (e.g. floods and droughts). In many circumstances, combining this green infrastructure with traditional grey infrastructure, such as dams, levees, reservoirs, treatment systems, and pipes, can provide next generation solutions that enhance system performance and better protect communities. The following figure shows the existing links between ecosystem services and human wellbeing. Figure 15: The links between ecosystem services and human well-being Source: IUCN Global Water Programme 2013 Promoting the Blue Economy and the integration of green and grey solutions requires the cooperation of sectors such as tourism, maritime transport, and fisheries, as well as their integration with coastal development plans. Furthermore, integrating green and grey infrastructure and promoting the Blue Economy would also help the generation of short-term employment and returns, as well as long term contributions. It would also support a speedy recovery for economic sectors that have been impacted most from the COVID- 19 pandemic, due to disruption of supply chain, falling demand, and the increased number of sanitary and regulatory measures that are currently in place. An essential part of the climate adaptation process is also the selection of appropriate funding and investments options, in particular Public Private Partnerships, thereinafter referred to as PPPs, business models and contracting options. PPPs, in particular (i.e. Government Funding, Corporate or On-Balance Sheet Finance, Project Finance), are critical in order to enable the embedding of sustainability into the design, implementation and management of climate adaptation measures. Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 37 5.2. Agriculture and forestry Impacts Nearly half of the population in coastal Georgia depends on agricultural activities to survive, predominantly in the Zugdidi, Khelvachauri and Kobuleti municipalities. Consequently, these areas are highly vulnerable to climate variability and change. The impact of climate change on Georgia’s agriculture sector is to be viewed in the context of agro-climatic zones, as discussed in the document Climate Change National Adaptation Action Plan for Georgia’s Agriculture Sector, published in 2017 and referred to as AgriNAP (EIEC, 2017). Agro-climatic zones are defined based by the following parameters: Sum of Active temperature 7, precipitation in the vegetation period, and average absolute minimal temperature. According to this classification, Georgia’s coastal area falls under zone C3, which represents the highest temperature and highest humidity, favourable conditions for citrus (mainly tangerine) growing. The study also indicates that this area increased during the period 1991-2015 as compared to 1966-1990 but is expected to shrink about three times by 2071-2100. This reduction is attributed to an expected temperature increase, and due to the increased period between rainfall events, which will result in a reduction of humidity for this zone in the longer term. The impact of climate change on agriculture and forestry sectors, in terms of translating climate change projections into cropping and forest performance, are summarised below (Table 8). Table 8: Change of area (km2) of the Agro-Climatic Zone C3 attributed to climate change Total active t 3900-5000o (zone C) humid>900 mm Years 1966-1990 (subzone 3) 4,448 humid>900 mm Years 1991-2015 (subzone 3) 5,816 humid>900 mm Years 2071-2100 (subzone 3) 1,910 Source: AgriNAP 2017 Warmer temperatures and the reduced frequency of frosty days/nights may create more favourable conditions for citrus production in the coastal zone, however, the moisture needed for citrus production will drop substantially by 2100, thus the areas favourable for citrus production are expected to be significantly reduced. These areas will need to be irrigated if they are to continue to produce this valuable crop. As for the areas favourable for tea growing, they are expected to expand inland from the coastal zone. Hazelnut production in West Georgia has grown quickly over the past decade, stimulated by growing foreign investment and exports. The areas along the coast suitable for hazelnut growing will also shrink due to the changing conditions forecast by climate change. Favourable areas for other crops will expand inland from the coastal zone, however the actual expansion of plantations will depend on water availability and economic feasibility, 7 Sum of Active Temperatures (SAT) – defines amount of warmth and is calculated over a year by summing daily average temperatures of air or soil which are above the biological minimum required for the development of a given crop. Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 38 also related to climate. Significant loss of hazelnut yields was observed in the past few years due to the spread of plant pests and diseases as well as intense hot winds that not only caused immediate damage, but also affected the fruit-bearing capacity of plants in the subsequent crop season. The total potato growing area is expected to increase throughout the entire coastal zone. However, the vulnerability of this crop to diseases that spread in a warm and humid climate is likely to negatively affect productivity and increase the cost of cultivation due to the need for pest control practices. Overall, climate change in the coastal zone is likely see the agricultural sector experience both gains and losses, and the final economic outcome will depend on the costs of mitigation measures. Since the mid-20th century, the upper edge of the coastal forested zone has moved about 300-400m towards the coast. This is attributed to climate changes that have resulted in heavier rainfalls which then caused the erosion of the fertile layer of soil under the forests which grow in high mountainous areas. But most of the damage to the coastal area’s forests is due to the spread of pests and disease stimulated by rising temperatures and increased humidity. Lesser ventilation of forests due to the decreasing occurrence of wind in many areas also helps the spread of plant disease. Forest health has been deteriorating in recent decades due to the exceptional spread of pests and diseases which occurred in Georgia in the past, as well as the appearance of new types of pests. More specifically, established pests which affect chestnut and coniferous species such as Cryphonectria parasitica, Dendroctonus micans, Ips typographus and Ips acuminatus are having a stronger negative impact; and pathogens which have spread over the past few decades include ohridella Deschka (chestnut moth), Tischeria complanella Hb = Tischeria Ekebladellia. Bjerkander (oak moth) and most importantly Cylindrokladium buxicola (box tree disease) – a fungus also known as boxwood blight. Since the turn of the century, this fungus has affected more than half of boxwood stands in the coastal zone, killing up to 100% of trees in individual stands. In Mtirala National Park, boxwood trees have disappeared, with no present sign of regrowth and recovery. The use of biopesticides against boxwood blight was unsuccessful. Some specimens were uprooted, which showed that their root systems had died, confirming that they cannot be revived. Boxwood stands are dead in the Kintrishi Gorge too, including in the Kintrishi Protected Areas. Boxwood moth Cydalima perspectalis is established as the pest causing disease. There are no distinct stands of chestnut in Kintrishi, but chestnut trees are mixed with other vegetation and have been severely damaged by chestnut blight (Cryphonectria parasitica). Almost each tree is affected, although to various extents. The strong presence of this fungus is supported by the high genetic diversity of the Georgian strains of C. parasitica. The presence of the Brown Marmorated Stink Bug (Halyomorpha halys) in the Kintrishi reserve is confirmed by specimens trapped on the sticky traps set up on the territory for pest detection. The Brown Marmorated Stink Bug `, also known as BMSB (Figure 16), was first reported in Georgia in 2015, and is thought to have been brought to the country from ornamental plants imported from Central Europe, via the Russian region of Sochi, after the XXII Winter Olympic Games of 2014 (Gapon, 2016). It then spread to the bordering Autonomous Republic of Abkhazeti and to the rest of Georgia. Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 39 Georgia’s coastal zone is becoming increasingly favourable for the proliferation of the BMSB as mild winters are essential for its survival. Chestnut plantations in particular were severely affected in 2016, drastically affecting successful commercial production and exports. In 2017, BMSB also damaged sunflower and maize plantations. The pest also affects the quality of stone and seed fruits and berries. Despite effective pest control measures undertaken through the State Program of BMSB control, the outbreak is far from over. BMSB also affects hazelnut plantations, a problem set to be exacerbated by climate change, enabling it to spread widely across forests stands. However, promising reports from growers indicate that well-managed hazelnut orchards surrounded by other managed orchards and riverbanks appear to be more resistant, compared to orchards surrounded by wild vegetation and forested areas. This is confirmed by field data which indicates a steady influx of the pest from unmanaged areas. While this may appear an interim solution, it will not stop the increasing prevalence of BMSB, nor help in improving the resistance of the plantations Figure 16: Brown Marmorated Stink Bug Source: Davide Bonora / Shutterstock.com Rangers in the Mtirala National Park reported the recent occurrence of a previously unrecorded pest on alder trees (Alnus barbata). Clear symptoms of damage on the leaves suggest that the pest is a brown tail moth (Euproctis chrysorrhoea), which is a severe defoliator of forests, hedgerows, orchards, and ornamental plants, and is widespread in Europe, including Georgia and Turkey. In Georgia, it is frequently found in agricultural plantations, but it had not been seen in wild-growing forests. These are caterpillars which create webs on the leaves and lead to complete defoliation by aggressively feeding on the soft parts of leaves. Climate change is likely to increase the conditions suitable for pests and diseases, which will negatively affect agriculture and timber yield, and hinder the potential expansion of economically important crops in the coastal region, such as potato, tangerine, tea, citrus, chestnuts and hazelnuts. The aforementioned AgriNAP covers this extensively and provides climate adaptation options and recommendations. Therefore, these are not Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 40 included in the section below or in the next Chapter. However, the AgriNAP does not cover another important impact of climate change on agriculture and forestry: the issue of soil erosion. Climate change predictions indicate that the increase of rain intensity and frequency in some areas of coastal Georgia is likely to exacerbate soil erosion, and potentially lead to a substantial loss of fertility. This will have a profound impact on the forestry and agriculture sectors, as well as on habitats and wildlife species, which depend on this vital supporting ecosystem service. Forest cover loss, which is also expected as a consequence of improved conditions for pests and diseases as well as from ineffective forest management monitoring practices, is also likely to accelerate this process as more bare land becomes exposed to extreme weather conditions. Soil deterioration is also linked to the loss of water retention capacity. As bare and unhealthy soils become more hydrophobic, repelling surface water rather than absorbing it, its natural flood control function – a critical regulating ecosystem service – is compromised. Degrading soils also compromise other regulating services, such as natural slope protection and carbon regulation (unhealthy soils lose their capacity to absorb and store carbon), as well as cultural services, which will all have an effect on communities’ health and wellbeing. SLR and coastal flooding will also have an impact on coastal freshwater due to the increasing level of salinization of coastal aquifers and the ingress of salty water through river estuaries. This is likely to have an impact on the agriculture sector, especially in lowland areas subject to frequent flooding. Adaptation options Climate adaptation for the agriculture and forestry sectors of coastal Georgia, in terms of translating climate change information into cropping and forest management practices, is extensively discussed in the aforementioned AgriNAP. AgriNAP’s adaptation measure recommendations, relevant to coastal Georgia, are summarised in the following table. The focus of this section, and of the adaptation options presented below, is on adaptation options not excessively covered in the AgriNAP, such as measures to reduce agricultural soil erosion and forest degradation. Table 9: Recommendations on adaptation measures from Agrinap which are relevant to coastal Georgia Impact from Climate Change Adaptation measures • Develop and support the introduction of high productivity and high-quality Reduced coastal areas tangerine varieties – Unshiu and Tiakhara Unshiu in the Adjara subtropical zone suitable for citrus (to prolong tangerine harvesting and trading season). production • Develop and support the large-scale application of agro-insurance by tangerine producers. • Implement the following agrotechnical measures in the hazelnut gardens: • Arrange drainage canals in order to remove redundant water; Reduced coastal areas • Arrange windbreak belts; suitable for hazelnut • For the purpose of water provision arrange boreholes and irrigation systems; production • Plant hazelnut bushes on creeping rock layers (by horizontals “like a chessboard”); • Take preventive measures against the spread of pests. Source: AgriNAP 2017 Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 41 The implementation of an integrated water resource and soil management system represents the main adaptation option. This approach would include integrated planning in order to adapt agriculture and forestry to climate change, through the following actions: introduce soil-repair plant species and practices; reinstate and protect wetlands; improve irrigation-drainage systems; implement soil condition, soil-moisture, meteorological and natural hazards monitoring and forecasting; improve forest monitoring and management practices; introduce sustainable livestock management practices; improve pest/diseases monitoring and management practices and introduce pest/diseases-resistant plant species; re-establish natural forest; improve crop storage facilities and handling practices; improve the monitoring of the impact of climate change on key crops, and identify crop wild alternatives, for example the sea medick (Medicago marina L), a wild relative of alfalfa able to tolerate a higher level of drought and soil salinity which is found throughout coastal Georgia (CWR, 2017). This last aspect is particularly important as it will help in the development of new, improved crops able to withstand new climatic conditions. This adaptation option is regarded as a long-term option for Georgia, particularly because the country has no integrated water resources management system at present. Investment and effective risk management strategies as well as the training of agricultural and forestry sector workers can help improve awareness. Investing in coastal-specific climate change research for these sectors, including the publication and distribution of sector-specific information for coastal Georgia, can also help raise awareness and support the implementation of climate adaptation processes and measures. 5.3. Commercial ports and oil terminals Impacts Georgia’s coastal region is highly dependent on commercial ports, primarily, Batumi and Poti; and oil terminals, primarily, Supsa and Kulevi. Port infrastructure has different vulnerabilities to climate change, in particular to SLR which influences port stability and operations. Ports are also extremely vulnerable to subsidence, which is directly connected to natural differential tectonic movements and anthropogenic activities such as the extraction of underground resources. It has been proven that the coastal land adjacent to the Rioni River mouth is sinking by 6.5mm/year, while the coastal area of Supsa-Kobuleti-Tsikhisdziri is rising by 1-2 mm/year (Джанджгава, К.И., 1979). Kakhaberi lowland, which is home to the port of Batumi, is sinking by 0.8mm/year. The origin of these subsidence activities appears to be linked to natural tectonic movement. However, further research is needed to confirm if this movement is also linked to specific anthropogenic components. The combination of rising sea levels and subsidence causes a wide range of effects that are experienced in the course of port operations. These are summarised in the following table. Table 10: Expected Impacts of climate change on the operation of Georgia’s sea-ports Climate variables Risks related to Climate Change Sea Level Rise • Increased erosion at waterfront structures and increase in overtopping rates, hence flooding of berth facilities. • Beach erosion. Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 42 Climate variables Risks related to Climate Change Increased • Extreme flooding could lead to loss of radar and radio equipment. intensity of • Capacity overload of the drainage system could lead to flooding and consequently the rainfall erosion of road and railway foundations, causing pollution, flooding of stacking and stockpiling yards and a lack of road access. • Outage of vessel’s dry bulk debarking process. Heatwave • Higher risk of rail track buckling. • Higher deterioration rates of pavements and roadways. • Higher energy consumption of refrigerated containers. • Inflammation of combustible dry balk (coal). Increased • Closure of linked modes of transport affecting supply and distribution of goods to and from intensity of the port. storms • Toppling of containers in stacking yard. (Lightning) • Outage of oil shipping of tankers. Increased • Increased wave action at waterfront structure and consequently an increase in overtopping intensity of storm rates, hence flooding of berth facilities. surge • Beach erosion. High speed winds • Damage to navigation and communication equipment. • Delays/stoppages to unloading/loading vessels. • Damage to (older) buildings and warehouses. • Outage of port crane operation. Rip currents • Destabilization of moored vessels on berth. • Towing vessels to open sea. • Suspending port operations. Source: World Bank Adaptation options The main adaptation option to address the impact of climate change on large commercial ports consists of developing an inter-disciplinary and inter-regional approach that delivers a suitable level of financing and the coordination of all stakeholders and partners. Such an integrated approach would also assist in addressing sediment movement and potential coastal erosion issues, which are often associated with the construction, operation and management of large commercial ports. The following table presents an overview of typical adaptation options for commercial ports. Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 43 Table 11: Adaptation options for commercial ports Action area Adaptation action • As extreme weather events become more frequent, more targeted investment in technology that expands the operating boundaries of equipment, for example, cranes that safely operate in stronger winds. • To address increased temperatures, alter refrigerated storage specifications to meet the demands of temperature changes and seek less energy intensive alternatives. Technologies • On-site renewable and low emission energy for a range of functions, to avoid risks associated with power disruption, the increased cost of energy and environmental legislative requirements. Some of this is already happening, for example, fuel cells that power mobile logistics elements and cool refrigerated cargo, and photovoltaic cells that generate administrative buildings’ power requirements. • The automation of logistics procedures is already being undertaken at some ports, and this process is expected to continue. • Future procurement of assets such as gentry loaders, conveyor belts, shore cranes, etc. needs to be assessed against future operating environment requirements. That is, the expected life of the equipment – and the anticipated future climate it needs to operate in – needs to be considered. • Storage facilities may need to be upgraded to accommodate more extreme events. • Assess and upgrade drainage systems to cope with projected intense rain events (potentially work in partnership with city governments for this option). Engineering • Ongoing hydrographical monitoring, to identify if dredging requirements need to be modified. • More robust dust suppression systems may be required (such as covering coal stockpiles, rather than just dampening). • Incremental growth of breakwaters as sea conditions require; alternatively, assessing whether breakwaters need to be reconfigured to deal with unpredictable swells conditions. • Roadways in, and though the ports, may need to be raised to respond to flooding issues. • Encouraging model shifts to improve resilience by introducing elements of redundancy into the supply system; that is, removing the reliance on EITHER rail OR road, but looking at better incorporating the two. Design and • Ensure climate changes are included in future design specifications, including maintenance accommodating future rainfall requirements into new building designs and incorporating sea level rises and storm surges into all port infrastructure elements. • Ensure ports have a proactive infrastructure and asset management plan that considers asset lifestyle elements, including altered materials deterioration regimes. • Working in partnership with city governments and supply chain logistics infrastructure providers to appropriately plan and design connected logistics hubs, resilient to the Planning impacts of climate change relevant for the area. • Investigate diversification of trade into climate resilient commodities. Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 44 Action area Adaptation action • Some risks cannot be mitigated, and instead, the risk may need to be outsourced to a third party, through purchasing infrastructure. Working collaboratively with insurance Insurance providers to determine quantitative elements of climate risk will assist ports to appropriately insure against risks they are unable to reduce. • The range of systems that could incrementally introduce climate considerations includes environmental, OHS, emergency and risk management systems. • Updating policy elements across the management systems to conclude consideration of climate change impacts • Incorporate training on climate change as a part of ongoing system training elements Management Systems • Consider appropriate strategies and matrix for different management systems, tailored for individual ports • Update legal compliance elements regularly • Develop pandemic plans as a part of the emergency preparedness and response system. This was discussed as an opportunity particularly for the northern ports as vector- and waterborne diseases become a more likely threat. Source: RMIT University 5.4. Tourism Impacts (introduction) While Georgia’s coastal region is increasingly dependent on its fast-growing tourism sector, its vulnerability is also increasing, as tourism is strongly affected by climate change. Vulnerabilities, which implicate people, assets, and natural features, including beaches, coastal vegetation and biodiversity, are mostly as a result of extreme weather, floods, and pollution. While a number of these issues can be addressed by the improvement of coastal planning and building and service compliance standards, it is also critical to raise awareness with stakeholders about climate change and its consequences, in particular the increasing magnitude and frequency of storms and waves which, coupled with sea level rises, will exacerbate coastal erosion. The majority of tourism activities in coastal Georgia, including seaside activities, wellness centres, and skiing, are directly related to weather conditions, in particular; air and sea water temperatures, rain and snow precipitation, sea turbulence, the stability of beaches, the frequency and intensity of sea storms and floods, the risk of avalanches, and the number and seasonal distribution of sunny days. The stability of road infrastructures also plays a crucial role in tourism, in particular where erosion and landslides affect roads and accessibility. A series of international rating systems have recently been developed to provide a systematic basis for assessing the climatic elements that most affect the quality of the tourism experience, the most popular being the Tourism Climatic Indices (TCIS), which measures tourism climate comfort. Tourism is also strictly linked to environmental factors, in particular: air quality, freshwater quality, sea water quality, and terrestrial and marine biodiversity. The issues that are expected to effect coastal Georgia are: an increasing severity of storms, warmer summers, biodiversity loss, a decline in water quality and increased disease outbreaks, including cardiovascular, repository and infectious diseases. Among the expected climate change impacts in the coastal zone for the Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 45 period of 2020-2050 ¬– based on the RCMs modelling – the following stand out as the most significant threats to the tourism industry in this area. In particular, the combination of sea level rises, increased heat and increased rainfall is expected to cause a wide range of impacts on coastal tourism operations over the years to come. These are summarised in the following table. Table 12: Expected impact of climate change on Georgia’s costal tourism sector Climate variables Risks related to climate change • Losses to tourist assets, including infrastructure and accessibility to beaches and natural sites. Sea level rise • Increased erosion at waterfront structures and an increase in overtopping and flooding rates of tourism facilities. • Erosion of popular tourist beaches. • Extreme rainfall events and consequent flooding could lead to loss of tourism transportation and communication infrastructure. • Closure of tourist attractions. Increased intensity of rainfall and storms • Closure of air/land and sea transport affecting tourists as well as the supply and distribution of goods. • Capacity overload of the drainage system could lead to flooding and consequently cause pollution of freshwater and seawater, as well as a lack of road access. • Higher risk of risk of overheating, and negatively impact people suffering from high blood pressure and cardiovascular diseases. Heatwave • Increased occurrence of water-born infectious diseases, due to higher sea water temperature and water pollution levels. • Higher energy consumption of air conditioning and refrigeration systems. • Increased wave action at waterfront structures and consequently an increase in Increased intensity of overtopping rates, hence flooding of tourism facilities. storm surge • Beach erosion. • Damage to coastal resorts and tourism equipment. High speed winds • Damage to trees and natural attractions. • Outage of air and sea operations. • Closure of bathing activities on tourist beaches. Rip currents • Suspension of maritime and marine tourist operations. Source: World Bank Impacts due to heat waves and warming of sea water temperature The increasing occurrence of very hot days and higher peak temperatures during the summer is likely to increase the risk of overheating, and to negatively impact people suffering from high blood pressure and cardiovascular diseases. This is also exacerbated by high air pollution levels. The occurrence of sunburn might also increase. Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 46 Warmer sea water may be pleasurable for many bathers, but it may also cause the spread of waterborne infectious diseases, which can be exacerbated by high water pollution levels. Summer seasons already show significant morbidity due to diarrhoea that may rise as a result of higher temperatures in future years. Changes in air and sea temperatures will also play a significant role in the loss of biodiversity and natural capital, both of which help attract tourists. All these impacts are currently being monitored, and a comprehensive assessment process is required to address these vulnerabilities. Impacts due to sea level rise and coastal erosion The predicted SLR for Georgia’s coastline is expected to cause severe losses to tourist assets, including infrastructure and accessibility to beaches, and natural sites. In the Guria region in particular, the Regional Development Strategy 2014-2021 notes that SLR will lead to considerable damage to valuable beaches with ‘magnetic’ sand and healing properties (MRDI_A, 2013). Increased damage to tourist beaches and coastal assets is also predicted for the Adjara and Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti regions, especially in Batumi where the highest SLR is expected. The main risk is associated with inappropriate urban zoning regulations and the booming construction activity in Batumi, Kobuleti, and on the very southern part of Georgia’s coast – in particular in the Gonio and Sarpi settlements. As discussed earlier, most of the newly constructed hotels are located in immediate proximity to the beach, some just 50-100m from the shoreline. With SLR, houses placed closest to the coastline will fall under immediate threat in the next few decades. This will inevitably escalate the intensity and costs for installation and maintenance of coastal protection efforts, which may have important economic repercussions especially if unplanned erosion events occur during the tourist season. This issue – a result of poor planning decisions over the past few decades – is improving slightly thanks to development strategies prepared by the three coastal regions, which provide some direction for coastal development for businesses (including hotels), and coastal infrastructure (including ports and oil terminals). Impacts due to failure of infrastructure and utilities Development of the tourism sector requires a strong infrastructural basis. Tourist infrastructure faces a number of threats from climate change and extreme events, such as the flooding and waterlogging of streets in coastal settlements; interruption of the provision of power and the consequent failure of cooling systems during summer months; damage to roads connecting tourist destinations; interruption in the provision of water and the malfunctioning of wastewater collection systems and the consequent risk of higher concentration of pathogenic bacteria in bathing water and possibility potable water contamination. All of these risks are directly linked to the safety and comfort of tourists in the coastal zone. If some of these risks materialize concurrently, and/or if they occur at high scale, the composition and volume of visitors’ inflow to the city Batumi and other destinations such as Kobuleti, Ureki-Grigoleti, Gonio-Sarphi, Anaklia, and Poti – Maltakva would certainly be affected. Adaptation options Climate adaptation options for the tourism sector consist of climate proofing infrastructure in the coastal zone, something critical for this sector. These include accommodation, catering, utilities, roads and other communications, beaches, trails and access to protected areas and other natural sites. Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 47 Despite these significant risks arising due to climate change, tourism in Georgia’s coastal zone is also facing some opportunities. With appropriate planning and marketing, industry and tourism operators can capitalize on the changes this region is expected to face. More specifically, the seaside tourism summer season operations may be extended from the months of July and August to a longer period of time spanning from May through to September. This increased season would be feasible due to the forecasted increase of air temperature in late spring and early fall, together with the warming of the sea, and the increasing number of days between rainfall events. New developments in the tourism sector need to be undertaken in a manner which doesn’t further exacerbate already existing risks, caused by rapid expansion and poor planning. There needs to be a new integrated coastal management plan which clearly identifies building zones with buffer areas based on climate risk modelling. To maximise return on investment, the tourism sector should combine climate adaptation with environmental and socioeconomic benefits. This approach would also help generate short-term employment and returns, as well as long term contributions, which are essential to support a speedy recovery for the economic sectors which have been worst affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. This can be supported by the development of a Blue Economy, to boost coastal and maritime economic activity, and the integration of green and grey infrastructure. In particular, green infrastructure represents an attractive win-win investment, providing on- the-ground climate adaptation and diversification and helps boost the growth of the tourism sector, as well as provides wider social and environmental benefits. A key benefit of the Blue Economy is that it would allow the development not only of Georgia’s coastal sectors but would also help integrate solutions across neighbouring Black Sea countries. 5.5. Energy and transport Impacts Georgia generates most of its power needs from hydropower plants, the majority of which are located in West Georgia. While hydropower generation is not facing a risk of water depletion as a result of climate change, at least in the short to medium term, the main challenge that these assets face is the risk of reservoir sedimentation. The transport of sediments may intensify due to the impact of climate change, predominantly from extreme rainfall events as well as from prolonged rain/no rain intervals, all of which can lead to an increasing rate of soil erosion within the watershed. Sediment trapping by dams also plays a crucial role in coastal erosion. Strong procedures are required for new and existing hydropower generation plants to ensure appropriate sediment passage. This would also help the environmental health of river systems. Transmission and distribution networks are also under rising pressure due to climate change. Extreme weather events, flooding in particular, may cause severe disruption of power supply to customers by affecting transmission and local distribution networks. There are nine high-voltage substations located within Poti municipality, some of which are located in a potential flood zone. Flooding of substations, due to heavy rainfall, combined with damage to other electricity distribution infrastructure, may interrupt the distribution of power of a 1,620kW average total load, impacting up to 8,000 customers. Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 48 Active slopes and the increased occurrence of landslides and avalanches will also have a direct negative impact on transmission line towers. Several of Batumi-Akhaltsikhe’s transmission line towers have already been dismantled and relocated because of unexpected damage from erosion and avalanches. Several additional towers are under high risk due to a large landslide which recently developed near the Akhaltsikhe substation. As a result, one section of the Batumi-Akhaltsikhe transmission line got re-aligned prior to the commencement of construction in order to mitigate against erosion and landslide risks. Increased rainfall and humidity may also intensify electromagnetic fields around high-voltage transmission lines, potentially requiring the expansion of the alienation corridor along the lines. The table shown below presents examples of climate stressors on transmission lines (Table 13). As for the transport sector, the main risk facing coastal Georgia is flooding. Flooding is common on sections of road connecting Batumi, Chakvi, Makhinjauri and Kobuleti, and causes the disruption of traffic and the risk of accidents. Flooding and landslides have temporarily blocked traffic from Batumi toward the border with Turkey. Roads in mountainous parts of Adjara, including the main road connecting Batumi with Akhaltsikhe, are prone to landslides and occasionally have to close in winter due to heavy snowfall. Occasionally Kobuleti railway station fails to launch trains under heavy rainfall due to flooding. The government is investing into the construction of bypass roads to facilitate transit, and into the upgrade of less vulnerable transport nods. These are smart investments, particularly if the roads are designed in climate-smart ways in terms of their road gradients and storm water drainage infrastructure. Table 13: Examples of climate stressors on transmission lines Transmission lines Increased risk of slope • Slope movement from • Extreme, sudden instability (surface water monitoring triggered failures and • Surface failures causing damage ground water triggered Precipitation (rockfalls, mudslides) failures) and Streamflow • Damage to transmission towers • Extreme, sudden Increased flooding along transmission route • Difficulties for accessing route for maintenance or monitoring Increased temperature • Conduction efficiency drops and • Gradual, long-term Temperature effects on conductor durability decreases capacity Lightening protection • Damage due to lightening • Extreme, sudden (changed risk) Atmospheric changes affecting solar radiation/solar flares Increased dust on • Problems with insulation due to • Gradual, long-term insulators dust Increased frequency, distribution and severity Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 49 Transmission lines of bush fires damaging transmission lines and substations • Increased frequency of right-of- • Gradual, long-term way maintenance since Warmer air temperature vegetation grows faster; ground clearance distance reduced by increased cable length Permafrost melting • Stability and anchoring become • Gradual, long-term problematic Source: Hydropower Sector Climate Resilience Guide (IHA, 2019) Adaptation options The first step in identifying adaptation options consists of undertaking research to better understand the risk that the country’s energy sector faces in relation to projected climate change trends, specifically the country’s hydroelectric sector. This should take into consideration the economic benefits of climate adaptation measures for this sector, as well as the additional socioeconomic and environmental benefits for other business sectors, infrastructure and communities. This type of research would also enhance the quality of the decision-making process. While individual adaptation measures would need to address specific issues, as in the example provided for transmission lines (Figure 17 and Table 14), it is also essential to build climate resilience into the system. To develop a strategic climate adaptation plan for this sector requires an inter-disciplinary and inter-regional approach. This would also help ensure there’s a suitable level of financing and the proper coordination of all stakeholders and partners. Consideration should be given to the capacity of energy systems to sustain cumulative impacts such as: a redundancy at peak periods; the sensitivity of regulators to climate change pressures on infrastructure and the possible need for redundant capacity; and demand management and energy conservation strategies. This type of integrated approach will also help address sediment deprivation and coastal erosion issues, which are often associated with the construction, operation and management of dams. This would also help improve institutional capacity and strengthen the legal framework for the renewable energy sector in order to increase energy efficiency in both generation and usage for key sectors of coastal Georgia’s economy, which are the main contributors to GHGs emissions. This approach would also attract additional investment which is required to further increase energy efficiency and renewable energy sources, a high priority for both economic and climate mitigation. Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 50 Figure 17: Gabion baskets arranged to protect towers of Batumi-Akhaltsikhe transmission line from erosion Source: The World Bank Table 14: Examples of structural and functional adaptation measures on transmission lines Climatic variable Impact on project component Potential resilience adaptation measures Increased risk of slope instability • Additional slope protection and stabilization (surface water triggered failures and measures ground water triggered failures) • Slope stability monitoring/surveying Precipitation Flooding along transmission route • Reassessment of transmission tower location and and Streamflow line alignment • Design transmission line foundations for greater stability uncertainty • Route selection (avoid flood plains, steep slopes) Temperature effects on conductor • Amendment of conductor specifications to ensure capacity they are more resilient for a range of temperatures Increased slow/ice loads on towers • Design towers to take into account high snow/ice and conductors loading Temperature Lightening protection (changed risk) • Ensure transmission towers are designed for lightening risks Atmospheric changes affecting solar radiation/solar flares Increased dust on insulators • Design protection for insulators Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 51 Climatic variable Impact on project component Potential resilience adaptation measures Increased frequency, distribution and severity of bush fires damaging transmission lines and substations Ground clearance distance reduced • Increase distance to the ground by increased cable length Problematic stability and anchoring • Alternative design with foundation not relying on in the face of melting permafrost permafrost Source: Hydropower Sector Climate Resilience Guide (IHA, 2019) 5.6. Health Impacts Coastal Georgia is expected to experience significant adverse health effects caused by climate change, mainly in relation to the expected rising temperatures and more intense heat waves. Heat wave and heat island effects are anticipated to be more severe in highly populated urban and tourist areas, such as Batumi. This is likely to significantly affect the most vulnerable sections of the population. Night temperatures (above 20°C) are also increasing, resulting in a decreased opportunity for natural cooling. Heat and changing temperatures present a risk to populations health and physiological well-being. Increased heat (day and night) is expected to result in direct physiological issues (heat stress and heat stroke), as well as changing vector disease and pathogen emergence and distribution as well as impacts to food safety. A lack of safe drinking water and the presence of pathogens also presents a high risk for coastal Georgia. Despite the recent improvements in this sector, climate change is likely to increase the likelihood of diseases caused by consumption of low-quality drinking water (cholera, leptospirosis, rotavirus infections). Coastal Georgia’s population health will also be affected by increased cardiovascular and respiratory systems diseases, which will be adversely impacted by climate change. All of these factors will place extra economic stress on coastal Georgia’s healthcare system. COVID-19 has highlighted how a robust healthcare system is critical in order to avoid large economic repercussions in case of another outbreak, as well as to support the tourism industry. This is particularly important as Georgia’s government recently announced the decision to promote the country as a safe zone from pandemics; a strategy that aims to help in the recovery of the tourism sector and the country’s economy. Furthermore, international researchers have investigated the links between air pollution level and mortality rate (Setti, 2020). Based on the results, it appears evident that a reduction in air pollution would also result in a decrease of the impact of viruses and other respiratory infections, thus significantly reducing the socioeconomic implications of potential new pandemic events such as COVID-19. The situation could also be exacerbated by climate change, particularly an increase in temperature and humidity which brings additional carrying capacity of particulate matter, and therefore of viruses, as well as stress to the respiratory system. Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 52 Adaptation options Georgia’s National Environment Health Action Plan 2018 – 2022 (NCDC, 2018) proposes a strengthening of the management of climate-related diseases during heat waves. Proposed actions include expanding the “green policy”, to support the greening of urban spaces, to protect water bodies, and to consider the increased heat wave risk in new building constructions (promoting green practices to allow maximum natural light and natural air flow/ventilation), with particular focus on vulnerable groups (e.g. school buildings, homes for elderly, hospitals). A first adaptation option consists of upgrading the health-care infrastructure in coastal Georgia in order to take into account climate change and to support more systemic resilience. This would include building capacity to the adaptation to extreme weather events and support the necessary response capacities. Improved monitoring and the development of Health Early Warning Systems is also needed, specifically for heat waves and the breaching of water quality standards. To be effective, monitoring of these parameters needs to be integrated with coastal hydrology and hazards monitoring. In particular, frequent flooding leads to higher risk of pollutants entering waterways, impacting drinking water and bathing water. This would allow observations of trends and allow advance forecasts for direct interventions against climate sensitive diseases. Increased investment coupled with targeted climate-health-adaptation research agendas can support the identification and analysis of trends and develop indicators to improve the health sector’s capacity to react. Another adaptation option is raising the awareness of healthcare system personnel to ensure they understand the relationship between climate change, environmental stress, pandemic viruses, and their effect on public health. Related public health measures must also be coherently integrated in other national mitigation and adaptation measures. In regard to the links between air pollution and the diffusion of pandemic diseases, Georgia’s Government has made steps to improve air quality. Recent policy changes encourage decarbonizing the transport sector, including traffic optimization and the promotion of alternatives to vehicle use. Boosting the new image of ‘Georgia – Safe Destination! can help maximise these efforts. 5.7. Coastal Infrastructure Impacts Georgia’s Black Sea coastline has never been stable: some of its segments have moved inland and others have moved seawards over decades and centuries. Not all these changes, however, can be attributed to natural processes. Quite the opposite: most of the coastline’s transformation has been due to the combined impact of human intervention and anthropogenic climate change. The most severe impacts are being experienced on sediment movement from the rivers draining into the Black Sea and along the coast. Sediment delivery by rivers is significantly constrained by hydropower dams, which trap most sediments behind the dams, as well as the intensive mining of natural construction material from the riverbeds. Natural deposition of delivered sediment is also altered by infrastructure installed on the coastline, and on the largest and most significant seaports. The impact from artificial interventions is amplified by the increasingly felt results of climate change. Coastal erosion and SLR is leaving coastal infrastructure (and other economic activities based on this infrastructure) Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 53 increasingly vulnerable. Sea ports, hotels, seaside resorts and beach infrastructure are located on the coastline for obvious reasons. However, the lack of spatial planning, zoning, and other regulations has caused the placement of housing and other types of infrastructure unjustifiably close to the coastline, exposing it to SLR and other consequences of climate change. As a result, the maintenance of beaches and the protection of coastal infrastructure requires permanent investment, the cost of which is expected to increase over time. A number of outdated coast protection measures have been used over the years off Georgia’s coast. The most innovative approach has probably been the construction of rock berms. This type of intervention was successfully piloted along the Adjara coastline and is currently being scaled-up (Figure 18). Concrete walls facing the beach with a terraced facade have also been used to protect the coastline in Kobuleti. A new wall was placed behind Kobuleti beach before the summer season of 2018 (Figure 19). It is intended to protect both beach infrastructure and the buildings located in the immediate proximity of the coastline. Placement of reinforced concrete blocks on the beach to protect residential houses built close to the coastline is also typical along Georgia’s coast (Figure 20). The table below presents the main types of coastal protection measures currently being used in Georgia (Table 15). Figure 18: Rock berm arranged along the coast Source: The World Bank Figure 19: Terraced sea wall at Kobuleti beach Source: The World Bank Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 54 Figure 20: Coast protection created with reinforced concrete blocks Source: Gia Russo, National Environment Agency, Ministry of Environment Protection and Agriculture The most innovative coastal protection structure in Georgia is most probably the submerged breakwater at Anaklia. The installation of this massive protective structure was planned to serve the needs of Anaklia Deep Water Port’s construction and its satellite infrastructure. Construction started in 2012 but was put on hold due to uncertainty around the financing of the project. The protective underwater structure was built with submerged reinforced tetrapods. The schematic design of this structure is shown in Figure 21 below. Figure 21: Scheme of submerged breakwater structure arranged with tetrapods (T.T.P.) Source: Municipal Development Fund of Georgia, Initial Environmental Investigation report for the Anaklia Coastal Improvement Project (Phase II) This submerged protective structure is apparently successful, however further monitoring is required to confirm the ongoing benefits. The following photos of the same area on the coast were taken in 2015 and 2018. The coastline appears to have advanced by some 50-70 meters in 3-4 years, which if confirmed by bathymetric and aerial surveys would indicate some noteworthy results (Figure 22). Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 55 Figure 22: Coast extension over three years after placement of underwater coast protection structure Coast photographed in 2015 Coast photographed in 2018 Source: World Bank This breakwater structure may have some impact (accumulation or erosion) on other parts of the coastline, however, information is not available as no study has been made to monitor this. Table 15: Main types of coast protection grey infrastructures currently applied in Georgia Methods of Coastline Protection Artificial deposition of sediment Placement of large-size rock berms along the coast Arrangement of terraced sea walls of reinforced concrete behind beaches Slag backfilling of seabed Placement of reinforced concrete 40- and 80-ton blocks Placement of deformable underwater of coastal berms Creation of submerged protection structures by placement of tetrapods Source: local consultants Adaptation options The selection of suitable adaptation measures to protect coastal assets depends on technical effectiveness, costs, expected benefits, and implementation characteristics. Generally, except in more heavily developed areas, adaptation options that favour ecosystem and living shoreline approaches (green infrastructure) are recommended over hard structures to stabilize the shoreline. As with all sectors, adaptation options can either be ‘planned’ or ‘reactive’. Most of the shoreline protection measures implemented along the coast of Georgia have been reactive. As the impact of climate change increases, planning measures are expected to be more cost-effective. Furthermore, an increase in property losses from coastal storms and sea-level rises will lead to increased insurance rates, creating an incentive to move away from hazard zones. The following table presents a list of adaptation measures that may be suitable for coastal Georgia. Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 56 Table 16: Examples of adaptation measures that could be used to reduce vulnerabilities of Georgia’s coastal infrastructures Adaptation measures Adaptive function PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: Healthy coastal ecosystems Coastal wetland protection • Acts as buffer against extreme weather events, storm surges, erosion, and floods; and restoration limits saltwater intrusion. Marine conservation • Improves the resilience of coastal ecosystems to climate change and improves the agreements economic and social conditions of coastal communities. • Maintains healthy and resilient coastal habitats and fisheries productivity; acts as Marine protected areas “refugia” and critical sources of new larval recruits. Payment for environmental • Provides incentives to protect critical habitats that defend against damages from services flooding and storm surges as well as coastal erosion. PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: Less exposed built environment Beach and dune • Protects shores and restores beaches; serves as a “soft” buffer against flooding, nourishment erosion, scour and water damage. • By incorporating climate considerations (e.g. effects of flooding, waves and wind) Building standards in building design, it reduces damages and human safety risks from climate change impacts, including extreme events, sea level rise, and flooding. Coastal development • Reduces the infrastructure losses and human safety risks of sea level rise, storm setbacks surge, and erosion. • Mitigates erosion and protects people and ecosystems from climate change Living shorelines impacts and variability in low to medium energy areas along sheltered coastlines (e.g. estuarine and lagoon ecosystems). Structural shoreline • Temporary buffer against the impacts of erosion and flooding caused by factors stabilization such as sea level rise, storm surge, and wave attacks. PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: DIVERSIFIED LIVELIHOODS • Contributes to the protection of rural livelihoods, food security and marine Fisheries sector good biodiversity against the impacts of extreme climate events, precipitation change, practices ocean acidification, sea level rise and sea surface warming. • Integration of climate change considerations helps safeguard against extreme Mariculture best climate events, precipitation change, ocean acidification, sea level rise and sea management practices surface warming. • Integration of climate change concerns helps promote the sector’s sustainability Tourism best management as well as safeguard against extreme climate events, precipitation change, sea practices level rise and sea surface warming. PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: HUMAN SAFETY • By proactive planning and capacity building that addresses the specific needs of Community- based disaster local communities, increases their resilience and ability to respond to the effects risk reduction of extreme climate events and flooding. • Informs coastal planning processes and policy, reducing the impact of flooding Flood hazard mapping resulting from storm events, heavy rains, storm surges, and extreme tides. Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 57 Adaptation measures Adaptive function PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: PLANNNG AND GOVERNANCE Coastal watershed • Preserves estuaries, which act as storm buffers and protect against coastal management groundwater salinization. Integrated coastal • Provides a comprehensive process that defines goals, priorities, and actions to management address coastal issues, including the effects of climate change. • Improves the management of discreet geographic areas where there are complex Special area management coastal management issues and conflicts, including issues related to extreme planning climate events, precipitation change, ocean acidification, sea level rise and temperature change. Source: USAID ‘Adapting to coastal climate change: a guidebook for development plannes’ (2009) 5.8. Water supply, wastewater/stormwater and solid waste management infrastructures Impacts Water supply, wastewater/stormwater and solid waste management infrastructures play a critical role, since their failure can result in extensive impacts to communities, property values and businesses, including damage to people’s health and wellbeing, as well as damage to tourism, agriculture, and forestry. Poorly performing wastewater treatment plants and solid waste disposal sites can also result in considerable damage to wildlife and coastal, marine and maritime ecosystems. Water supply and wastewater/stormwater collection systems were malfunctioning in Georgia’s coastal zone for a long time due to glitches in design and operation as well as a lack of maintenance. Wastewater treatment was confined to a primary stage for some settlements and was non-existent in many others. A large-scale investment into the rehabilitation of water supply and sewage/drainage utilities started in 2005 in Batumi with a KfW-support Municipal Infrastructure Rehabilitation Program. Later, in 2015, integrated improvement of water supply and sanitation systems started in the semi-urban and rural areas of Kobuleti, Khelvachauri, Keda, Shuakhevi and Khulo municipalities, an area that covers 330 villages and is home to 235,000 residents. Viewing these investments through the climate lens, the risks related to water availability are low or even negligible. The present abundance of water resources in Adjara, as well as in the future (as forecasted with RCM tools), means that water availability should not be a problem. However, the likelihood of more severe and more frequent flooding, and a higher occurrence of water erosion and landslides carries the risk of physical damage to water intakes, piping and other elements of infrastructure that may interrupt their smooth operation. As for the storm water collection infrastructure, its exposure and vulnerability to the forecasted impacts of climate change are considerably more problematic. Seaside towns are already prone to flooding as the storm water drainage systems are unable to cope with intense rainfalls. The functionality of these stormwater drainage schemes will depend not just on the duration and intensity of rainfall, but the fluctuation of sea levels. The latter depends on seasonality, the strength of sea storms, and is also influenced by long-term tectonic activity and global warming. A conceptual approach to the design of a stormwater management system would include having a single, central pumping station that would receive the entire volume of collected rainwater from a given settlement and pump it into the sea. The same facility Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 58 would be used to receive intruding sea water and pump it back to the sea during storm surges. If the most severe climate change scenarios materialize, very large and costly pumping systems may be required. Coastal Georgia has a severe lack of solid waste management infrastructure. Standard solid waste landfills are very few in number; several large official waste disposal facilities have been upgraded as a temporary measure, while rural areas are home to countless small informal dump sites. Significant improvements were initiated with the adoption of the Waste Management Code in 2014 and the creation of Georgia Solid Waste Management Company under the Ministry of Regional Development and Infrastructure in 2015. The new national waste management system is based on a network of regional landfills and waste transferring stations, designed to serve about 65% of the country’s population. Tbilisi municipality and the Autonomous Republic of Adjara are not part of this system and operate their own waste management schemes. No standard sanitary landfills exist in Georgia’s coastal zone at present, but there are two already planned and currently under design: one in Zugdidi, in the Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti region, and another in Tsetskhlauri, in the Adjara region. These facilities will enable authorities to the close-down and seal, to the extent possible, the existing sub-standard disposal sites. The site located to the South of Batumi is most detrimental for coastal ecology and the economy (Figure 23). Situated right on the seaside, near the Choroki river mouth, and in a high- water table area, this landfill – which has been operating under sub-standard conditions for decades – is set to close in January 2021, when the new site currently under construction is expected to be completed. The same applies for the Kobuleti landfill, located about 20km north of Batumi. Once the new site in Tsetskhlauri is operational, the use of the two old sites in Batumi and Kobuleti will be discontinued. However, this does not mean that pollution from these sites will stop. Without a proper disestablishment phase, which the government is planning to tender for in the coming year, environmental damage and leaching issues are likely to remain, particularly under forecasted climate change scenarios. The new landfill in Adjara and the one planned for Zugdidi, are likely to face the challenge of evacuating storm water and maintaining leachate treatment ponds as more frequent, longer and more intense rainfalls and subsequent flooding events are predicted in these areas. Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 59 Figure 23: Seaside waste dump near Batumi Source: Livelihood Restoration and Resettlement Framework, Solid Waste Management Project, Adjara Autonomous Republic, Georgia, prepared by Green Partners in partnership with WYG International, 2015 Adaptation options Water supply, wastewater/stormwater, and solid waste management infrastructures are connected to all the main economic sectors in coastal Georgia. Therefore, the adaptation options needed to address key vulnerabilities to climate hazards should involve all stakeholders and integrate other climate adaptation measures. The tourism sector is particularly dependent on the performance of wastewater/stormwater and solid waste management systems, and this dependency is likely to grow due to the effects of climate change. For this reason, it is important to support co-management and co-location of wastewater treatment plants and solid waste landfills. This approach would also allow for a reduction of vulnerabilities and explore opportunities for integrating energy recovery systems. Co-location also would bring economic and environmental benefits and may make it easier for interdependencies to be understood, and for systemic planning to take place. Table 17 below presents a summary of climate adaptation measures that may be suitable in order to reduce the vulnerabilities of water supply, wastewater/stormwater, and solid waste management in coastal Georgia. One way to maximise returns on investment, climate adaptation of water supply, wastewater/stormwater and solid waste infrastructures is to combine environmental and socioeconomic benefits. This approach would also help in generating short term employment and returns, as well as long term contributions, in order to support a speedy recovery for the economic sectors that have been impacted most by the COVID-19 pandemic. This can be expedited with the development of a Blue Economy, which integrates development for coastal and maritime economic activities as well as the use of green and grey infrastructure. Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 60 Table 17: Adaptation measures to reduce vulnerabilities of water supply, wastewater/stormwater, and solid waste management infrastructures in coastal Georgia Impact from Climate Change Adaptation measures Risk of coastal and fluvial flooding of water • Protect existing and properly functioning water supply and supply and wastewater/solid-waste wastewater facilities against flooding and direct impact of infrastructures due to extreme weather events. increased river flows (water intake facilities, pumping stations/treatment plants): increase site construction standards and levees, reduce height above ground of plants, ensure water-resistant housing for underground infrastructures, implement green solutions including natural SUDS drainage and rainwater capture systems to reduce run-off, and natural water retention/flood control. Loss of primary transport route due to extreme • Increase flexibility through multiple transport options. weather events, causing delays to site access, operations delayed or halted (for waste, also causing inward delivery and onward transport of waste stream). Loss of power supplies to wastewater/solid- • Provision of local source of heat and power (if resilient), waste management sites due to extreme weather implement closed loop energy recovery systems (from events and increased demand for emergency waste/water). power, causing stoppage of operations and loss of critical communications. Loss of water supplies to wastewater/solid- • Maximize use of recycled water / onsite supplies, waste management sites due to extreme weather development of more dry treatment options, develop on- events and increased demand for emergency site water supplies. water, causing stoppage of operations and loss of critical communications. Closure of local businesses due to extreme • Develop procedures to deal with spikes in demand to avoid weather events, causing a reduction in over- use of wastewater/solid-waste treatment. waste/water treatment demand during the emergency, followed by spike as businesses resume operations. Increased demand for health and emergency • Continue drive to improvements in health and safety¬¬, services, causing a slower response rates in the ensure emergency treatment available on-site. case of site health and safety emergencies. Risk of overloading water supply and • Integrate climate change adaptation and mitigation in wastewater/solid-waste management system building codes, and new construction rules/technological during the summer months. standards established for water supply, wastewater and solid waste. Reduced water supply in rural areas due to the • Combine artificial groundwater recharge, wastewater re- impact of climate change, in particular use, rainwater harvesting, protect most vulnerable villages infrastructure damage and prolonged droughts. dependent on shallow wells from drought by moving to more reliable sources of water. Risk of water contamination in rural areas due to • Improve wastewater infrastructure capacity in rural areas inappropriate wastewater infrastructure capacity and build intercepting collector drainage downhill of villages and extreme events. in flood and landslide-prone areas. Source: adapted from ‘Increasing the climate resilience of waste infrastructure’, AEA/Defra 2012 UK Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 61 Chapter 6. Conclusions and Recommendations 6.1. Introduction Using the information obtained from the analysis described in Chapters 3-5, and from consultations with local government officials and local and international experts, the initial recommendations required for addressing climate risks in coastal Georgia were identified. For each recommendation, key actions are selected, based on the following criteria: institutional acceptance, financial feasibility, robustness against possible climate futures, cost-effectiveness and additional benefits (environmental and socioeconomic). Climate change will involve rural and urban areas of the eight municipalities within the three coastal regions under the facto jurisdiction of the government of Georgia, impacting all economic sectors for this region; one which generates about 20% of the country’s GDP (or US$ 2.14 billion based on current data). Current data do not provide a clear indication of how many people, out of the 554,700 living in this area (246,700 in rural areas and 308,000 in urban areas), which stakeholders, or which segments of the society are going to be most severely impacted by climate change. As stated in the new NDC, which is currently in draft, Georgia is renewing its commitment to study its adaptive capacity to climate change by mobilizing domestic and international resources for the most climate vulnerable sectors: agriculture, forestry, human health, infrastructure, tourism, surface and ground water resources, mountain ecosystems and biodiversity. The draft NDC also indicates that the Fifth National Communication to the UNFCCC, which is also in draft, will identity areas in the country that are subject to climate risks, in particular flooding, and populated areas with a threat of displacement from climate change. The revised NDC does not specifically address the coastal area of Georgia, which presents severe risks as a result of climate change, as well as remarkable development opportunities. The Green Climate/UNDP funded project, which is currently in progress and aims to reduce the risk of climate- driven disasters in Georgia, includes the revision and expansion of the climate change models initially undertaken for the third communications to the UNFCCC. While this model represents state-of-the-art climate modelling, it does not focus specifically on the country’s coastal zone. A climate change risk assessment process for coastal Georgia is required to identify people, assets and businesses that are expected to be most impacted, and to recognise which adaptation actions will benefit most coastal communities and businesses. The integration of a Blue Economy approach represents a great opportunity to maximise return on investments and integrate climate adaptation with environmental and socioeconomic benefits. These benefits are to be acknowledged by all stakeholders, including public institutions and communities, which will play a significant role in harnessing the potential benefits. Climate adaptation actions involve the use of conventional grey infrastructure as well as a menu of green infrastructure. Prior to planning and developing new grey infrastructure, it is essential to assess what role the existing green infrastructure can perform in mitigating climate change impact and undertake the cost-benefit analysis of preserving it. Integrating green and grey infrastructure can result in lower costs and more resilient services. Service providers such as water utilities, flood management agencies, irrigation agencies, and hydropower companies can deliver more cost-effective and resilient services by integrating green and grey Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 62 infrastructure approaches into their plans. However, to guide its appropriate use in mainstream infrastructure programs, green infrastructure must be as rigorously evaluated and carefully designed as grey projects. Investing in green and grey infrastructure for climate adaptation and developing a Blue Economy can also contribute to the post-COVID-19 economic recovery of coastal zone communities and businesses. Implementing green and grey climate adaptation solutions on the ground can offer longer term investments to “build back better” in post COVID-19 (i.e. through short terms employment opportunities and cash-for-work programs for coastal restoration, waste pick up, land management). Recommendations are clustered in three sections using the 3 “I” approach: Information Recommendations, which address knowledge gaps; Institutional Recommendations, which address governance, policy, and legislative gaps as well as planning gaps; and Investment Recommendations, which address financial and implementation gaps. These are described in the following sections. A summary of the recommendations and key actions is also included in the Executive Summary (Table 1). 6.2. Information recommendations RECOMMENDATION 1. Improve the climate change planning process for coastal Georgia (R1) The current official source of climate change projections for Georgia is the model undertaken at the International Centre for Theoretical Physics in preparation to the Third National Communication to the UNFCCC. While the model is of international standard, it is mainly available at a national level. An improved climate change risk assessment process would enable stakeholders to undertake more accurate climate forecasts for the coastal area, which is expected to experience a significant increase of climate risks in the coming years. Action 1. Undertake a Climate Change Risk Assessment for Coastal Georgia (R1A1) Global datasets need to be translated in order to run risk assessments for Georgia’s coastal region. For areas facing high risk, the collection of reliable local data is recommended, in order to ensure the correct suite of climate change actions is chosen, and to reduce vulnerabilities and the risk of conflicts. This would involve inter-regional collaboration across the regions of Adjara, Guria, and Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti, to ensure integration of adaptive interventions, particularly for addressing flooding and coastal erosion vulnerabilities. A coastal-specific climate change risk assessment process would also help to make sure there is a robust monitoring system in place, utilizing state-of-the-art monitoring systems and well- defined parameters. It is advisable that Georgia’s government follows the EU’s approach for assessing climate change impacts and vulnerability, or the UK’s Climate Change Risk Assessment (CCRA) framework, which is currently utilised by a number of other countries. Such a study, which would need to be regularly reviewed (i.e. every five years), would enable there to be officially classified risks, impacts and vulnerabilities in terms of the current and predicted impacts of climate change. This process is summarised below (extracted from UK’s 2017 CCRA): Step 1: Understand present-day vulnerability and assess current climate-related risks, opportunities and levels of adaptation. Step 2: Understand future vulnerability and adaptation and assess how climate and socio-economic change may alter climate-related risks and opportunities. Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 63 Step 3: Prioritise risks and opportunities for which additional action is needed in the next five years to manage the risk or take advantage of the opportunity. The CCRA would represent a single and official repository of known and accepted climate change risks for the country, clarify some of the driving mechanisms for expected changes, and list key selected measures for addressing these shortcomings. Planning of climate adaptation options is a process that relies solely on the quality of data from CCRA. It is therefore essential to ensure such a study is undertaken at the right time. Ideally, for planning adaptation measures the resolution for climate change predictions should be the same as the one used for weather prediction. This would provide a greater level of confidence for strategic planning at regional and municipal level, where most on-the-ground action takes place. The CCRA should include a climate scenario analysis tool, to explore time and space trends in vulnerability and resilience for coastal Georgia, based on the influence of different factors, and the impact from different climate change scenarios. This information can then be used to review and update adaptation strategies and plans in order to take into account the extremes of the range provided, and prioritize actions to be implemented on a probability/risk basis (i.e. the expected seasonal average precipitation range could be expressed in amounts to -x% to +y% in summer, and -x% to +y% in winter, where a negative change indicates less precipitation and a positive change indicates more precipitation). This approach also provides a probability/risk basis for planning for the right type and cost of adaptation measures. The CCRA process should also allow for the identification of hazards to vulnerable population/livelihoods and natural assets in coastal Georgia and raise climate awareness. The 4th communication to the UNFCC, which is currently being prepared by Georgia’s government, highlights that the most climate vulnerable groups in the country that need urgent adaptation are: children and young people, women, the elderly, people with disabilities, people with chronic illnesses, and internally displaced people at risk of climate change and as a result of climate change. The draft document also reinforces the need to strengthen the role of women as agents of change by engaging in climate change-related activities through their involvement in decision- making. A broad mapping process is required to ensure all climate vulnerable groups in coastal Georgia are assessed, and a coastal specific climate information campaign is implemented to raise the awareness and increase capacity building. The CCRA should be reviewed at regular intervals (i.e. every five years). It is also essential to ensure CCRA is undertaken with a participatory approach involving all main stakeholders, in order to ensure sufficient buy-in and to take into account the complex interactions with socio-economic factors, including individual and collective preferences and values. Action 2. Develop a One Map to assist the prioritization of required actions and dissemination of key information (R1A2) It’s vital to ensure a robust and transparent methodology is used to prioritize the most critical risks, based on the magnitude of potential consequences and likelihood of occurrence, and discussions with stakeholders. A powerful way to represent this visually is the use of a One Map, as a single official repository of climate georeferenced information. The map should also identify georeferenced mapping of critical coastal assets, both natural and built assets. Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 64 Hazard assessment should also include mapping of climate vulnerable species, habitats, and ecosystems, which represent Georgia’s natural capital. The coastal zone’s climate risks and vulnerabilities should be clearly georeferenced. This allows for a rapid identification of the most critical communities, infrastructure, businesses and ecosystems. The map is also able to represent on-the-ground adaptation actions. This would enable an effective visualization and tracking of the benefits provided by the various adaptation measures. This approach also allows for a consistent, repeatable, participative and audible method to look at current and future risks and opportunities. Action 3. Improve the understanding of monitoring and accounting of ecosystem services for climate adaption (R1A3) Accounting for ecosystem services flows and demand is crucial to weigh climate vulnerabilities and assess the environmental and socioeconomic performance of climate adaptation measures. Accounting tools and spatial models should be used to assess the proximity between the potential of ecosystem services and the actual demand, to determine the actual flows, and assess changes in the service use. The resulting accounting tables, which will be able to show linkages between nature-based functions and the various components of human needs, and the monetary value of nature-based services, can then be used as institutional and financial incentives as well as for regulatory functions. Action 4. Assess socioeconomic benefits of climate adaptation measures (R1A4) When dealing with climate risks associated with land use at local level, it is essential to clearly identify the benefits to all stakeholders, as well as various divergences and trade-offs. These apparent trade-offs could lead to maladaptation and un-coordinated responses to climate change, thus exacerbating the risks (Brown, 2018). For example, the choice of adaptation measures varies dramatically depending on factors such as whether local government is focusing on food production versus environmental protection, which can lead to significant consequences in terms of managing flood risks (Huntingford, 2014). Despite recent advances in prediction tools, it remains a challenge to identify the interdependent links between the natural and the anthropic worlds and the benefits that communities and businesses obtain from the natural environment. For climate adaptation process to be effective, it is essential to assess the links between biophysical and socio-economic components of risk exposure and vulnerability (Jurgilevich et. al., 2017). This requires innovations in scenario development, for example, using the IPCC Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSP) framework at coastal scale. The use of socioeconomic tools and agent-based models is also advised in order to investigate public preferences and human behaviours and to reduce the uncertainties of future societal responses when planning for successful adaptation actions. (Mach, 2017). To deal with the great deal of remaining uncertainties due to the combination of unknown earth response and societal response, is also advisable to include in the CCRA a full range of extreme future scenarios, which allows for more explicit analysis regarding the potential goals of adaptation responses. Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 65 RECOMMENDATION 2. Identify key knowledge gaps towards the preparation of a Blue Economy Development Framework (BEDF) to support climate adaptation (R2) Developing a BEDF would enable Georgia’s government to raise the ambition of the NDC, support the implementation of climate adaptation measures, through the preparation of policy, fiscal, and administrative reforms, and identify value creation opportunities from Blue Economy sectors and strategic financial investments. A key requirement for this action is proper data and knowledge collection from the coastal, marine, and maritime sectors. Action 1. Undertake an institutional, policy and legal gap analysis for the development of the coastal, marine, and maritime sectors and inclusion of climate change adaptations (R2A1) Innovation and growth in the coastal, marine and maritime sectors could deliver food, energy, transport, among other products and services, and serve as a foundation for sustainable development, as well as critical regulating and cultural ecosystem services. Diversifying countries’ economies beyond land-based activities, along their coasts is critical to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals and delivering sustainable, climate-smart, and inclusive growth globally. In order to enable the exploration of this growth opportunity in Georgia, an assessment of the different activities around the coastal, marine and maritime sectors is needed. This assessment would enable an understanding of the current framework that regulates coastal, marine, and maritime sectors and identify the conditions that could enable or restrict blue growth. The assessment would also enable the understanding of new emerging technologies; how the nature of activities is changing; the relationship between ecological, economic or social factors, and the current policy and regulatory environment. The outcome of this diagnostic process will lead to the preparation of a Blue Economy Development Framework (refer to action R3A1). The output of this assessment should also contain the names of Ministries, Authorities, Agencies and Departments associated with the development of the coastal, marine, and maritime sectors and inclusion of climate change adaptation, as well as all relevant Laws, Policies, Act, Codes, and Guidelines. Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 66 6.3. Institutional recommendations RECOMMENDATION 3. Prepare a Blue Economy Development Framework to support climate adaptation (R3) The aim of the BEDF, which was launched in 2019 by the World Bank and the European Commission, is to help coastal countries and regions develop evidence-based investment and policy reform plans for its coastal and ocean resources and transition to diverse and sustainable Blue Economies while building resilience to climate change. Establishing this framework would help meet the NDC’s ambition of addressing the impact of climate change on coastal and marine ecosystems, infrastructure and communities, and create a synergy between climate adaptation and mitigation measures. A BEDF would also provide employment generation opportunities for coastal communities, reduce pressure on coastal and marine ecosystems and enhance their productivity in a sustainable manner. Implementing the BEDF would enable Georgia’s government to prepare policy, fiscal, and administrative reforms, identify value creation opportunities from Blue Economy sectors, and identify strategic financial investments which could support on-the-ground implementation of climate adaptation measures. Key requirements for this action are the institutional assessment of the costal, marine, and maritime sectors (refer to action R2A1) and the involvement of all stakeholders. The BEDF would also help identify new manufacturing opportunities which could take advantage of the opportunities of competitive labour costs, low utility costs and access to large markets without customs duty, and at the same time contribute with building capacity, attracting and retaining skills, knowledge, and resources. Action 1. Develop policy and plans to integrate the Blue Economy Development Framework into costal Climate Change adaptation (R3A1) The aim is to combine the consideration of economic, social, cultural, and environmental needs in the coastal, marine and maritime sectors, to make more efficient use of available resources, consider how diverse activities can be better integrated in a shared space for mutual benefit, and to provide better guidance and clarity to decision-makers and greater certainty to the private sector. The new legislation is to ensure that the views of all those with an interest in the coastal, marine and maritime environment, especially identified climate vulnerable communities (refer to Action R1A1), are considered when deciding how resources are to be used. The policies and plans would also protect valuable ecosystem services and natural resources, and better understand and manage the cumulative effects of different marine activities, both on the ecosystem and each other. This would also allow stakeholders to anticipate the predicted impact of climate change on the coastal, marine, and maritime environment, understand how business activities contribute to climate change, and how they are likely to be affected. Action 2. Prepare an Integrated Coastal Zone Management Plan and Marine Spatial Plan that supports climate adaptation (R3A2) Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 67 The purpose of the new Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) plan, which should use as input findings from information recommendations and from the existing studies, including the previous ICZM, is to enable an effective, climate-smart and integrated governance of Georgia’s coastal zone sectors and resources, support the Blue Economy potential for the region, and coordinate efforts to protect coastal ecosystems and biodiversity. The ICZM will integrate the findings from the CCRA (R1A1) to ensure coastal and marine development plans take into account climate risks and address identified vulnerabilities. One of the main objectives of the ICZM is to integrate existing and yet-to-be built green and grey infrastructure to address key climate risks for coastal Georgia, in particular to reduce the impact of floods (fluvial, urban and coastal) and coastal erosion to the coastal zone’s communities, businesses, and infrastructure. The ICZM also needs to ensure the availability of sufficient volumes of sediments for coastal Georgia, which is vital for undertaking artificial beach nourishments as well as for maintaining and constructing coastal infrastructure. The ICZM should take into account the needs of the various coastal and maritime sectors in order to address the impact of climate change, as well as issues caused by each sector to other businesses, infrastructure, communities, and the environment. This means that the ICZM needs to address the damage that hydropower dams and commercial ports cause to coastal sediment balance and harmonize the efforts that these sectors need to do to avoid exacerbating climate change impacts on other infrastructures and on the tourism sector. Dams and ports should ensure that sediment bypass systems are integrated in design and operation, as well as in the maintenance of new and existing facilities. The ICZM should also be used to assist in the development of innovative PPPs, business models and contracting options which are required to finance adaptation measures on the ground. The ICZM would enable the development of a forward-looking land use plan for the optimal siting of public/private coastal infrastructure and prevent a worsening of existing geomorphological transformation of the coastline which occurred due to inappropriate coastal developments. The ICZM also includes the preparation of a Marine Spatial Plan (MSP), which would enable an effective, climate-smart and integrated governance of Georgia’s maritime and marine sectors and resources, and coordinate efforts to protect maritime and marine ecosystems and biodiversity. The MSP would allow the development of Georgia’s marine space so it meets its needs in a sustainable way and reduces the loss of natural capital and ecosystem services from the Black Sea; reduce conflicts within the region, and create economies of scale and efficiencies for enforcement and management. Action 3. Develop policies and plans to promote the smart use of grey and green infrastructures for climate adaptation of Coastal Georgia (R3A3) National and local government agencies should consider promoting green and grey infrastructure in order to address climate adaptation and support Blue Growth in the coastal region. This will encourage service providers to assess if and how green infrastructure components can be incorporated into their infrastructure projects. The new policies should include tax subsidies, regulations, and financial incentives to ensure that service providers and their partners integrate green infrastructure into mainstream project appraisal processes and investments. Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 68 It is also critical to introduce a statutory requirement to ensure that the performance of green infrastructure is evaluated from a technical, environmental, social, and economic perspective. This information would also provide guidance for policymakers and development partners, to review the incentives and enabling conditions. The incentives should also encourage coastal agencies, service providers, stakeholders, and investors to routinely assess opportunities to integrate green infrastructure approaches in regional and master planning, as well as land-use planning processes, such as river basin or urban development plans Finally, legal requirements and incentives are needed to ensure that prioritization for green infrastructure is in support of climate vulnerable communities (refer to Action R1A1). RECOMMENDATION 4. Allocate institutional responsibilities required to action climate adaptation plans Suitable institutional responsibilities are needed to enable multi-sectorial implementation of climate adaptation plans and of the Blue Economy Development Framework. Action 1. Allocate suitable responsibilities to integrate climate adaptation actions with Blue Economy Development Framework (R4A1) Innovation and growth in the coastal, marine and maritime sectors and implementation of climate adaptation actions requires defined institutional roles. This action uses the findings from the institutional gap analysis (R2A1) to assign required responsibilities to integrate climate adaptation plans and the Blue Economy Development Framework and ensures measures are in place to sustain expertise and retain capacity. Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 69 6.4. Investment recommendations RECOMMENDATION 5. Undertake a Climate Adaptation Financial Business Plan for coastal Georgia (R5) A comprehensive Climate Adaptation Financial Business Plan is necessary to prioritize on-the-ground climate adaptation interventions and identify required funds and possible funding mechanisms, from Government, Private Sectors and Development Partners. The plan, which would identify priority investments as well as timelines, resources, and targets, would enable the financing of key required green and grey climate adaptation infrastructures, as well as supporting the development of the region’s Blue Economy. The business plan would include a mixture of investment/permitting incentives and regulatory steps required to shift adaptation action into private sector’s mainstream activities/financing. Combined climate smart and blue growth investments would provide considerable long-term financial return for dollars invested, as well as quantifiable ecological benefits. This would help in leveraging a larger pool of dollars, which can assist with providing extra funds for climate adaptation measures. Promoting Blue Growth and the implementation of green and grey infrastructures also provides considerable short-term returns and supports the economic recovery for workers and business that are impacted by COVID-19. In Europe, the Blue Economy alone provides about 5.4 million jobs and generates a gross added value of almost €500 billion a year. Action 1. Identify Private Public Partnership (PPP) opportunities to implement the Climate Adaptation Financial Business Plan for coastal Georgia (R5A1) Facilitate the co-operation between stakeholders that have an interest in the coast (business owners, service providers, policymakers, financial institutions, researchers, civil society, regulators, and communities) to implement on-the-ground climate adaptation measures that support a Blue Economy and the integration of green and grey infrastructure. Partnerships among these actors, in collaboration with and support from development partners, is needed to transition to next generation climate smart infrastructure, integrating the consideration and assessment of natural systems throughout the project cycle, promote growth for the region, and provide short term returns to help economic recovery post COVID-19. Action 2. Prioritize the most critical on the ground climate adaptation measures for coastal Georgia and secure funds for fast implementation (R5A2) A cost-benefit analysis is required to prioritize the most critical on the ground climate adaptation measures, based on the findings from the Climate Change Risk Assessment, and to reduce the impacts on climate vulnerable communities, infrastructure and businesses (refer to Action R1A1). Prioritizing critical climate adaptation measures would allow to reduce the main risks for coastal Georgia (including flooding, coastal erosion, soil and forest degradation, and pollution) and improve climate risks monitoring and preparedness. Identified actions would be integrated into the coastal zone management project (refer to action R3A2) and would take into account risks identified in sector-specific studies (e.g. AgriNAP for the agriculture sector). Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 70 References Джанджгава, К.И., 1979. Engineering geology of the shelf zone and the Black Sea coast within the Caucasus. Мецниереба, Тбилиси Adger, W.N., et. al. 2018. Advances in risk assessment for climate change adaptation policy. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 376: 20180106. Browder, G. et al. 2019. Integrating Green and Gray: Creating Next Generation Infrastructure. Washington, DC. World Bank and World Resources Institute. Available at: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/31430 License: CC BY 4.0 CWR, 2017. In search of the elusive sea medick on Georgia’s Black Sea coast. The Crop Wild Relatives (CWR) Project, funded by the Norwegian Government, September 2017. [Available at https://www.cwrdiversity.org/sea-medick/]. Dottori, F., et al., 2018. Increased human and economic losses from river flooding with anthropogenic warming. Nature Publishing Group. EIEC, 2017. Climate Change National Adaptation Action Plan for Georgia’s Agriculture Sector. Environmental Information and Education Center of Georgia, 2017. Elizabarashvili, M., et al., 2017. Georgian climate change under global warming conditions. Annals of Agrarian Science. 15, p. 17-25. Gapon, D.A., 2016. First records of the brown marmorated stink bug Halyomorpha halys (Stål, 1855) (Heteroptera, Pentatomidae) in Russia, and Georgia. Entomological Review, Volume 96, Issue 8 Gallo, D., Victor, D., G., Levin, L., A., 2017. Ocean commitments under the Paris Agreement. Nature Climate Change volume 7, pages833–838. 30 October 2017 Giardino, A. et al., 2015 (Part B). Batumi Coastal protection: coastline evolution modelling study of the baseline situation. Deltares 2015, Unit Marine and Coastal Systems, Delft, The Netherlands. Herr, D., Landis, E., 2016. Coastal blue carbon ecosystems. Opportunities for Nationally Determined Contributions. Blue Climate Solutions, The Nature Conservancy, IUCN, GRID-Arendal, Conservation International and World Wildlife Fund. [Available from: www.iucn.org/resources/publications]. Huizinga, J., Moel, H. de, Szewczyk, W. 2017. Global flood depth-damage functions. Methodology and the database with guidelines. EUR 28552 EN. doi: 10.2760/16510. ICTP, 2015. Regional climate model of International Center for Theoretical Physics [Available at: http://www.ictp.it/research/esp/models/regcm4.aspx] IHA, 2019. Hydropower Sector Climate Resilience Guide. International Hydropower Association, 2019 IPCC, 2018. Annex I: Glossary [Matthews, J.B.R. (ed.)]. In: Global Warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty [Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, H.-O. Pörtner, D. Roberts, J. Skea, P.R. Shukla, A. Pirani, W. Moufouma-Okia, C. Péan, R. Pidcock, S. Connors, J.B.R. Matthews, Y. Chen, X. Zhou, M.I. Gomis, E. Lonnoy, T. Maycock, M. Tignor, and T. Waterfield (eds.)]. Lewandowsky, S., Lewandowsky, S., Ballard T, Pancost, 2015. Uncertainty as knowledge. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 373, 20140462 (10.1098/rsta.2014.0462) Luijendijk, A., Hagenaars, G., Ranasinghe, R., Baart, F., Donchyts, G., and S. Aarn- inkhof. 2018. The state of the world’s beaches. Scientific Report. Vol. 8, pp. 6641. MA, 2005. Ecosystems and Human Wellbeing: Synthesis. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Island Press.Washington, DC, p. 137. MEPA_A, 2015. Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (INDC) of Georgia. Government of Georgia, 2015. [Available at: http://www4.unfccc.int/submissions/INDC/Published Documents/Georgia/1/INDC_of_Georgia.pdf] Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 71 MEPA_B, 2015. Georgia’s Third National Communication to the UNFCCC. Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources Protection of Georgia, 2015. [Available at: https://unfccc.int/resource/docs/natc/geonc3.pdf] MRDI_A, 2013. Development Strategies for Guria for the years 2014-2021. Ministry of Regional Development and Infrastructure, 2013. MRDI_B, 2013. Development Strategies for Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti administrative regions for the years 2014-2021. Ministry of Regional Development and Infrastructure, 2013. NCDC, 2018. National Environment and Health Action Plan of Georgia 2018-2022 (NEHAP-2), National Center for Disease Control and Public Health. Setti, L., et al., 2020. SARS-Cov-2 RNA Found on Particulate Matter of Bergamo in Northern Italy: First Preliminary Evidence. Dept. Industrial Chemistry, University of Bologna. Tatui, F., et al., 2019. The Black Sea coastline erosion: Index-based sensitivity assessment and management-related issues. Ocean and Coastal Management 182 (2019) 104949, September 2019. UNDP, 2013. Climate Change Strategy of Adjara (included into the Third National Communication to the UNFCCC), UNDP in Georgia, 2013. UNDP, 2014. Upper Svaneti Adaptation Strategy to Climate Change (included into the Third National Communication to the UNFCCC). [Available at: https://www.undp.org/content/dam/georgia/docs/publications/GE_UNDP_EE_Upper_Svaneti_adaptation_Climate_Cha nge_Eng.pdf] USAID, 2016. The Georgian Road Map on Climate Change Adaptation. A contribution of the National Association of Local Authorities of Georgia (NALAG) and the Institutionalization of Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation in Georgian Regions (ICCAMGR) project. USGCRP, 2017. Climate Science Special Report / Fourth National Climate Assessment (NCA4). US Global Change Research Program, 2017. [Available at: https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/ ] Zenkovicha, V.P., Schw, M.L. 1987. Protecting the Black Sea - Georgian S.S.R. Gravel Coast Journal of Coastal Research, 3(2), 201. Charlotteville, 1987. WBG, 1998. Project Appraisal Document on a Proposed Credit and a Grand from GEF to Georgia for an Integrated Coastal Management Project. The World Bank, November 1998. WBG, 2019. Climate Risk and Adaptation Country Profile for Georgia. World Bank Report. Final Draft V3. WBG, 2020. The Cost of Coastal Zone Degradation in the Country of Georgia: A tool for the Coastal Zone Climate Adaptation Plan and the National Determined Contributions. World Bank report. Final draft V2, May 2020. WRI, 2020. Aqueduct Floods Methodology: Technical Note. January 2020. [Available at: https://wriorg.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/aqueduct-floods-methodology.pdf] Website 1. https://climateknowledgeportal.worldbank.org [accessed on 12 May 2020] Website 2. http://www.cleanenergygroup.no/projects/namakhvani/ [accessed on 12 May 2020] Website 3. https://seeing.climatecentral.org [accessed on 24 May 2020] Website 4. https://www.mpimet.mpg.de/en/science/models/mpi-esm/echam/ [accessed on 22 June 2020] Website 5. http://gforge.ictp.it/gf/project/regcm/docman/?subdir=5 [accessed on 22 June 2020] Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 72 Bibliography პროექტი. საქართველოს კანონი. საქართველოს ტყის კოდექსი [Available at: https://info.parliament.ge/file/1/BillReviewContent/214674 ; sourced on 4 February 2020] Arrow K., Solow R., Portney P.R., Leamer E.E., Radner, R. and H. Schuman. 1993. Report of the NOAA Panel of Contingent Valuation. Federal Register 58: 4601–4614. Ahouissoussi N., Neumann J. E., Srivastava J. P., Okan C., and Droogers P. 2014. Reducing the Vulnerability of Georgia’s Agricultural Systems to Climate Change: Impact Assessment and Adaptation Options, The World Bank. Akyıl FT, Hazar A, Erdem İ, Öneş CP, Yalçınsoy M, Irmak İ, Kasapoğlu US. 2015. Hospital Treatment Costs and Factors Affecting These Costs in Community-Acquired Pneumonia. Turkish Thoracic Journal,16(3):107-113. Barbier, E. 2007. Valuing Ecosystem Services as Productive Inputs. Economic Policy, 22, 177-229. Biausque, V. 2012. The Value of Statistical Life: A Meta-Analysis. OECD ENV/ EPOC/WPNEP (2010)9/FINAL OECD ENV/ EPOC/WPNEP (2010)9/FINAL Berkun, M., Aras, E., 2012. River sediment transport and coastal erosion in the south-eastern Black Sea rivers. Journal of Hydrology and Hydromechanics, 60(4):299-308 DOI: 10.2478/v10098-012-0026-z Borrelli, P., Robinson, D.A., Fleischer, L.R., Lugato, E., Ballabio, C., Alewell, C., Meusburger, K., Modugno, S., Schütt, B., Ferro, V., 2017. An assessment of the global impact of 21st century land use change on soil erosion. Nat. Commun. 8, 2013. Brander L., Sovann C., Kharazishvili D. and Ms. Memiadze N. 2016, The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity for the Forestry Sector of Adjara Autonomous Republic, Georgia. WWF-Caucasus Programme Office. Bolt, K. Ruta, G., and Sarraf, 2005. M. Estimating the cost of environmental degradation: A Training Manual in English, French and Arabic, The World Bank Environment Department, Paper No106 Bouvier, Rachel A., John M. Halstead, Karen S. Conway, and Alberto B. Manalo, 2000. The Effect of Landfills on Rural Residential Property Values: Some Empirical Evidence. JRAP 30(2):23-37 Carson R., W., Hanemann M., Kopp, R. J., Krosnick, J. A., Mitchell, R. C., Presser, S., Ruud, P. A., and V. Kerry Smith. 1996. Was the NOAA Panel Correct about Contingent Valuation? Croitoru, L., Sarraf, M, 2010. The Cost of Environmental Degradation Case Studies from the Middle East and North Africa. Directions in Development. The World Bank, Washington DC. Climate Vulnerable Forum and DARA, 2012. Climate Vulnerability Monitor, A Guide to the Cold Calculus of a Hot Planet, 2nd Edition. [Available at: https://daraint.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/CVM2-Low.pdf] Croitoru, L., Sarraf, M., 2018. How Much Does Environmental Degradation Cost? The Case of Morocco. Journal of Environmental Protection, 9, 254-265. Croitoru, L., Miranda, J.J., Sarraf, M. 2019. The cost of coastal zone degradation in West Africa: Benin Côte d’Ivoire, Senegal and Togo. The World Bank, Washington DC. De Groot, R. et al., 2012. Global estimates of the value of ecosystems and their services in monetary units, Ecosystem Services, 1(1):50-61. Dixon, J.A., Scura, L.F., Carpenter, R.A. and Sherman, P.B. 1994. Economic Analysis of Environmental Impacts. Earthscan, London. Douglas, R., CEO of the Capital, Science and Policy Practice at WillisUN Environment. The 1-in-100 Initiative. UN Environment / Climate Initiatives Platform [Available at: http://climateinitiativesplatform.org/index.php/The_1-in- 100_Initiative ; accessed on 30 January 2020 ] Delft University of Technology, Long-Term Shoreline Changes (1984-2016). [Database available at: http://aqua- monitor.appspot.com/?datasets=shoreline ; accessed on 30 January 2020] Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 73 DEFRA, 2018. The National Adaptation Programme and the Third Strategy for Climate Adaptation Reporting: Making the country resilient to a changing climate, 128 pages. ISBN 978-1-5286-0758-2, CCS0718089334 07/18, HC 1403 2018-19. Devadze, A., Prokopenko, O., Zhuravka, F. 2019. The problems of development of the tourism industry in Georgia. Tourism and Travelling, Volume 2, Issue 1, 2019. LLC “CPC” Business Perspectives, Ukraine. Di Leo, M., et al., 2015. Batumi coastal protection: facing decreasing river discharges of gravel and canyons traps. Proceedings of the 36th IAHR World Congress 2015, The Hague, the Netherlands. ESPON Climate. Climate Change and Territorial Effects on Regions and Local Economies. Applied Research, 2013/1/4, Final Report Version 31/5/2011 [Available at: https://www.espon.eu/climate ] Eilander, D. et al, 2017. Global coastal flood hazard mapping. 19th EGU General Assembly, EGU2017, proceedings from the conference held 23-28 April 2017 in Vienna, Austria., p.5487 Fann, N., Lamson A.D., Anenberg S.C., Wesson K., Risley D., Hubbell B.J., 2012. Estimating the National Public Health Burden Associated with Exposure to Ambient PM2.5 and Ozone, 32(1):81-95 Freeman, M. 2003. The Measurement of Environmental and Resource Values: Theory and Methods, Resources for the Future. Washington, D.C.; Global Burden of Disease (GBD). 2017. Risk Factor Collaborators. 2018. Global, regional, and national comparative risk assessment of 84 behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks or clusters of risks for 195 countries and territories, 1990–2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. Lancet 392: 1923–94. Garrod, G. Pickering A., Willis K., 1993. The economic value of botanic gardens: a recreational perspective. Geoform, 24(2):215-224 GEMET, 2019. Definition of Environmental Degradation. GEMET, GEneral Multilingual Environmental Thesaurus. Available at https://www.eionet.europa.eu/gemet/en/concept/15154/ Accessed December 2019. Giardino, A. et al., 2015 (Part A). Batumi Coastal Protection: assessment of technical alternatives for coastal erosion protection based on numerical modelling. Deltares 2015, Unit Marine and Coastal Systems, Delft, The Netherlands. Giardino, A. et al., 2015 (Part C). An Integrated Sediment Management Scheme for the Coastal Area of Batumi (Georgia). Deltares 2015, Unit Marine and Coastal Systems, Delft, The Netherlands. Giardino, A., et al., 2014. Batumi Coastal Protection: review feasibility studies and assessment of technical alternatives. Deltares 2014, Unit Marine and Coastal Systems, Delft, The Netherlands. Hunt, A., Ferguson, J., Hurley, F. and A. Searl. 2016. Social Costs of Morbidity Impacts of Air Pollution. OECD Environment Working Papers, No. 99, OECD Publishing, Paris. International Energy Agency, 2016. World Energy Outlook, Special Report on Energy and Air Pollution. Available at: http://pure.iiasa.ac.at/id/eprint/13467/ Johnston, R.J., Rolfe, R., Rosenberger, R.S. and Brouwer, R. 2015. Benefit Transfer of Environmental and Resource Values: A Guide for Researchers and Practitioners. Springer, Berlin. Kordzaia, T., Chigilshvili, L., 2019. Residential Real Estate Sector Batumi: Understanding the Potential. TBC Capital Research, July 2019. Law of Georgia / Waste Management Code, 2014 [Available at: https://matsne.gov.ge/ka/document/download/2676416/1/en/pdf] Guidelines for Responding to the Effects of Climate Change in Coastal and Ocean Engineering. 3rd edition, May 2012, revised June 2013. The National Committee on Coastal and Ocean Engineering, Engineers Australia [Available at: https://www.engineersaustralia.org.au/sites/default/files/content-files/2016-12/vol_1_web.pdf] Global Facility for Disaster Risk Reduction and Recovery and The World Bank Group, 2018. Increasing the Climate Resilience of Georgia’s Secondary Roads. Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 74 GALT & TAGGART. Bochorishvili, E., Samkurashvili, K., 2018. Tourism at Full Speed. Georgia’s Tourism Sector. Galt and Taggart Research [Available at: https://galtandtaggart.com/upload/reports/16905.pdf] Gabbatiss, J., 2019. ‘Climate chaos’: Melting ice sheets will trigger extreme weather across the world, warn scientists.[Available at: https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change-melting-ice-antarctica- greenland-arctic-global-warming-gulf-stream-amoc-a8766521.html] Government of Georgia, 2014. Social-economic Development Strategy of Georgia ‘Georgia 2020’. [Available at: https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/linked-documents/cps-geo-2014-2018-sd01.pdf] IPCC, 2018. Special Report / Global Warming of 1.5°C [Available at: https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/] Leung, R. L., L. O. Mearns, F. Giorgi, and R. L. Wilby, 2003. Regional climate research: Needs and opportunities. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 84, 89-95. Lindsay, R., 2019. Climate Change: Global Sea Level. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, United States Department of Commerce [Available at: https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate- change-global-sea-level; accessed on 29 January 2020] Lindhjem, H., Navrud, S. and Axel Braathen, N. 2011. Valuing Lives Saved from Environmental, Transport and Health Policies: A Meta-Analysis of Stated Preference Studies. Risk Analysis, 31, 1381-1407. Mendelsohn, R. and Olmstead, S. 2009. The Economic Valuation of Environmental Amenities and Disamenities: Methods and Applications. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 34, 325-347. Markandya, A. 2014. Economic Principles and Overview of Valuation Methods for Environmental Impacts. Manuscript. Narain, U., Sall, C., 2016. Methodology for Valuing the Health Impacts of Air Pollution. Discussion of Challenges and Proposed Solutions. World Bank/ Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation. Washington D.C. National Statistics Office of Georgia. 2019. Georgia Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey 2018, Survey Findings Report. Tbilisi, Georgia: National Statistics Office of Georgia. https://www.unicef.org/georgia/media/3501/file/Georgia_MICS_2018_en.pdf National Statistics of Georgia, 2018. Agriculture of Georgia 2017, https://www.geostat.ge/media/21009/2017-wlis- soflis-meurneoba.pdf NASA, 2020. Global Climate Change / Vital Signs of the Planet. Sea Level, Satellite Data 1993-till present. [Available at: https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/sea-level/; accessed on 29 January 2020] NASA, 2018. Global Climate Change / Vital Signs of the Planet. Video: Global Temperature Variation [Available at: https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/101/video-global-temperature-variation ; accessed on 29 January 2020] OECD, 2018. Climate-Resilient Infrastructure. Policy Perspectives. Environment Policy Paper No.14 [Available at: http://www.oecd.org/environment/cc/policy-perspectives-climate-resilient-infrastructure.pdf] Pagiola, S., von Ritter, K., and J., Bishop. 2004. Assessing the economic value of ecosystem conservation. Environment Department Paper No.101. Washington: World Bank. Prahal, B., et al., 2018. Damage and protection cost curves for coastal floods within the 600 largest European cities. Nature/Scientific Data, 2018. Pepping, C. 2012. Feasibility study of an artificial sandy beach at Batumi, Georgia. Master thesis report, ARCADIS – TU DELFT, Delft, The Netherlands. Ready, R.C. 2010. Do Landfills Always Depress Nearby Property Values? The Journal of Real Estate Research, 32(3):321- 340 Samek L. 2016. Overall human mortality and morbidity due to exposure to air pollution. International Journal of Occupational Medicine and Environmental Health, 29(3):417-26. Sartori, M., G. Philippidis, E. Ferraria, P. Borrelli, E. Lugatod., L. Montanarella, P. Panagos, 2019. A linkage between the biophysical and the economic: Assessing the global market impacts of soil erosion. Land Use Policy, 86:299-312 Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 75 Science for Environment Policy, 2018. What are the health costs of environmental pollution? Future Brief 21. Brief produced for the European Commission DG Environment by the Science Communication Unit, UWE, Bristol. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/science-environment-policy . Stanchev, H., Palazov, A., Stancheva, M., Apostolov, A., 2011. Dermination of the Black Sea area and coastline length using GIS methods and landsat 7 Satellite images. Institute of Oceanology. 2011 Stanaway, JD, Afshin A, Gakidou E, Lim SS, Abate D, Abate KH, et al., 2018. Global, regional, and national comparative risk assessment of 84 behavioral, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks or clusters of risks for 195 countries and territories, 1990–2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. Lancet, 392:1923–1994 Scripps Institution of Oceanology at UC San Diego. The Keeling Curve (a daily record of global atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration). [Available at: https://scripps.ucsd.edu/programs/keelingcurve ; accessed on 29 January 2020] Scott, H., McEvoy, D., Chhetri, P., Basic, F. and Mullet, J., 2013. Climate Change Adaptation Guidelines for Ports, Enhancing the resilience of seaports to a changing climate report series. National Climate Change Adaptation Facility, Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology (RMIT) University [Available at: https://www.nccarf.edu.au/sites/default/files/attached_files_publications/Scott_2013_Climate_change_adaptation_gui delines_for_ports_Final.pdf ] UNESCO, 2012. United Nations world water development report 4: managing water under uncertainty and risk. The United Nations World Water Development Report 4, Volume 1. UNESCO, 2012. UNISDR, 2015. The Human Cost of Weather-Related Disasters 1995-2015. The United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction, 2015 Viscusi, K. and Masterman, C.J. 2017. Income Elasticities and Global Values of a Statistical Life. Journal of Benefit Cost Analysis. 8, 226-250. World Bank, 2016. The Cost of Air Pollution. Strengthening the Economic Case for Action. World Health Organisation (WHO), 2015. Economic cost of the health impact of air pollution in Europe: Clean air, health and wealth. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe. Walton, H., R. Boyd, T. Taylor, and A. Markandya. 2003. Explaining Variation in Amenity Costs of Landfill: Meta-Analysis and Benefit Transfer. Department of Economics and International Development, University of Bath, U.K. Woltjer, G.B. and M.H. Kuiper, 2014. The MAGNET Model: Module description. Wageningen, LEI Wageningen, UR (University & Research centre), LEI Report 14-057. 146 pp. World Bank, 2015. Georgia Country Environmental Analysis: Institutional, Economic, and Poverty Aspects of Georgia’s Road to Environmental Sustainability, World Bank Group Report Number ACS13945 Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 76 Appendix This appendix presents some clarifications regarding the CoED study referred to in Chapter 4, and more specifically the study’s limitations as well as the methods used to assess the cost of the environmental degradations mentioned. CoED Study Limitations The study suffers from data limitations, which prevented the team from deriving more accurate estimates of CoED. For example, the cost from air pollution could not rely on sufficient coverage of air quality monitoring data for 2017: daily and annual mean concentrations in micrograms per cubic meter for PM10 and PM2.5 where unavailable for outdoor and indoor air pollution and for other standard air pollutants, such as Ozone, Nitrogen dioxide and Sulphur dioxide. The same is true for data on water pollution (e.g. damages caused by the discharge of untreated agricultural and industrial wastewater); waste management (e.g. damages caused by inappropriate/insufficient disposal of waste other than municipal, such as medical, industrial, construction and demolition, e-waste); floods (e.g. damages caused by flooding from sea level rise and storm surges); and erosion (e.g. slower GDP growth in the future due to less real estate on the coastal zone). Also, no data were available to study CoED associated with commercial ports. This is expected to be an important component and should be included in further studies, in order to assess the impact of ports on sediment migration and the cost of maintaining ports as a result of sand accumulation. As a result, the estimates in this study should be considered as very conservative, and to have captured only a partial amount of the real CoED. Despite these limitations, the results are considered to be reasonable estimates of the magnitude of the CoED and reflect the true environmental priorities of Georgia’s coastal zones. Every effort was made to ensure that the environmental damages were estimated by applying consistent valuation methods, as explained in section 2.2.1. Despite these efforts, the study is affected by some limitations. For example, when no better data from specific case studies were available for the eight municipalities, the valuation was based on broad cost assumptions and on benefits transfer of similar measures from other countries of similar economic development, an exercise which involves a certain degree of inaccuracy and is based on assumptions that can be considered sometimes controversial. Another issue was the lack of systematic statistical records from which to derive the loss of property or rental values due to proximity to amenities, such as legal and illegal waste dump sites, and the absence of studies linking loss of tourist welfare from declining environmental quality along the beachfront and seashore. A further limitation is related to the valuation of mortality. Valuing life in monetary terms is controversial. The Value of a Statistical Life (VSL) concept has been developed by environmental economists, based on people’s Willingness To Pay (WTP) to avoid the risk of death (Viscusi and Masterman, 2017). However, even though this idea is commonly used in applied studies such as the present one, its application is still subject to important challenges. For example, Georgia is one of the countries where primary surveys have not been conducted, so the VSL must be obtained through benefits transfer of a value from a different country, or via a benefit transfer function. In the present study, the VSL for the eight municipalities has been obtained through benefits transfer of a base value from OECD countries. Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 77 Finally, it should be also noted that the CoED reported here refers to the year of analysis and it captures both losses of stocks (e.g. losses of buildings to erosion) and flows (e.g. loss of agricultural yield), while the GDP is a measure of annual flow. In this study, expressing the CoED as a percentage of GDP is meant only to benchmark the damage against a well-known macro-economic indicator, and not to directly compare the two values. CoED Study’s Valuation Methods The CoED can be estimated based on various valuation methods (Table 18). The manner in which these methods were employed in the CoED study is described below. Table 18: Environmental Degradation evaluation methods used in CoED study Environmental degradation Method used for valuation Floods Fluvial Flooding Damage to assets and economic productivity • Replacement cost to ecosystem service Coastal Flooding Damage to assets and economic productivity • Replacement cost to ecosystem service Erosion Coastal Erosion Damage to infrastructures, residential houses, • Damage to assets and economic productivity tourism and other businesses, due to severe waves, storms and sea surges Pollution Waste Pollution Damage due to uncollected municipal waste, • Market price damage due to inappropriate disposal of municipal waste. Agriculture & Agricultural soil Forest Loss in agricultural productivity • Benefit transfer from external simulation studies Forest degradation and forest reduction Loss in forest ecosystem services • Benefit transfer from broader region Source: CoED report (WBG, 2020) Water and waste pollution. Insufficient or inappropriate water supply, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) can affect human health (e.g. due to water-borne diseases) and the environment (e.g. due to discharge of untreated wastewater). This category concerns estimates of the impacts on health through the burden of water-borne diseases caused by unsafe WASH in the coastal zone, both urban and rural, of the eight municipalities. Various categories of health and other types of data were sought, but the only data provided included some information on the incidence of water pollution-related morbidity and mortality. The data provided were insufficient to even attempt the necessary computations. As a consequence, no estimation of CoED was possible for this important category. The acquired information suggests that although this type of environmental degradation was not prominent in 2017, it contributed in the reduction of tourism opportunities, and it led to fish contamination, groundwater pollution, and sometimes human deaths and increased morbidity. Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 78 As for pollution from waste, a unit transfer value approach was used for both regulated and unregulated landfills. The effect of lost property values from closeness to landfills has been studied by Ready (2010) in the US. The results suggest that property adjacent to active landfills (i.e. closer than 500mt), loses on average 12.9% of its market value. The study uses this percentage for both land and houses within 500mt from regulated landfills as identified by GIS inspection of cadastral data. Fluvial and coastal floods. Coastal Georgia suffers from fluvial floods, which occur when rivers burst their banks as a result of sustained or intense rainfall, or sudden thawing of snow and ice from the mountain in the interior when temperature rises. It also suffers from pluvial floods, which occur when the ground cannot absorb rainwater effectively or urban drainage systems are overwhelmed by excessive water flow, and coastal floods, which occur when severe storms and high waves cause sea surges. The CoED from fluvial floods in Georgia’s coastal zone is calculated for floods of various magnitudes. The potential annual impact of a floods on GDP is estimated by using the Aqueduct flood analyser 8 for the coastal municipality of Zugdidi. This model is used to produce corresponding flood water depth, which along with its area of coverage, are translated into losses, using flood damage functions. To reflect the damage functions, the team used Huizinga et al. (2017), who conducted a review of worldwide literature on flood damage functions. For coastal floods, the available data did not include indication of costs associated with flooding events. So, this cost was not included in the CoED estimates. In terms of coastal zone erosion, without the required specific information it was only possible to undertake a very high-level economic valuation of the annual CoED caused by dams impounding the sediments along the river Chorokhi. Additional CoED for sediment deprivation due to the presence of dams in Georgia could also be estimated, based on recent studies on the overall amount of sediments carried by Georgian rivers (Berkun, 2012). A cost of sediment replacement along the coast was computed, inclusive of opportunity cost of use elsewhere in the economy. Agricultural soil and forest degradation. Unsustainable management of agricultural soil and forests results in the degradation of these important natural resources. Forests and agriculture are important components of welfare production for coastal communities. With a large percentage of Georgian people (including coastal Georgia) still maintaining some direct link to these activities by ownership or co-ownership of land, and with its crops being mostly grown for self-consumption, an estimate of the economic loss associated with these natural resources is necessary to complete the picture of CoED. Despite this economic loss being relatively small compared with others, its importance hinges on its widespread impact across the population. 8 https://floods.wri.org Impacts of Climate Change on Georgia's Coastal Zone, November 2020 79 www.worldbank.org