2. Page 2
ALLIANCE AND
NETWORK
BUILDING IN
GEORGIA
GEORGIAN ALLIANCE ON
AGRICULTURE AND RURAL
DEVELOPMENT – GAARD
•Uniting 19 stakeholders
representing following
constituencies:
•2600 small holder farmers
•181 private sector entities of which
31 agro consulting companies and
150 processors and exporters
•11 panel of experts uniting 100
specialised experts.
3. Page 3
SECTION I: CONTEXT ANALYSIS
• The country is highly dependent on foreign imports (e.g. in 2010, 85% of the consumed
wheat was imported). (ENPI)
• 63% of the persons identified as living under poverty line, are self-employed in the
agricultural sector (and still are extremely poor). (Dadalauri 2012, p. 37).
• Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (article 11) – Right to Food
• Georgia signed the convention in 1994
• About 43.3% of the whole territory of
Georgia is agricultural land (MoA 2012,
p. 10).
• 53.1 % of the workforce in 2011 was
classified as employed in agriculture
(around half a million in absolute terms).
• According to the 2010 data, state
budget allocations to the agriculture
development amounted only 1.3% of the
total state budget, whereas GDP share
from the agriculture was 9%.
4. Page 4
SECTION II: WHAT DID YOU DO?
• Initially informal alliance was formed while advocating for
the Law on Agricultural Cooperatives
• Formalised the organizations into one Alliance through
forming Memorandum of Understanding
• MoU legitimized relationships among stakeholders and
organized common goals into one direction
6. Page 6
SECTION IV: WHAT DID YOU
ACHIEVE?
• The legal framework for development of agriculture
cooperation system is in place
• A consensus-based, well-recognized and influential civil
society mechanism for policy dialogue
• Accumulated , advanced expertise and experience in
agriculture and rural development
• A sound mechanism for reflecting the interests of target
constituencies and for enhancing the level of
participation and representation of disadvantaged
groups.
7. Page 7
SECTION V: WHAT WORKED WELL
AND WHAT DIDN’T?
• Forming Alliance fosters team spirit and sense of
common goal
• Dalogue between the government and civil society
through the Alliance
• Organizing around specific objectives (ex. Law on Agr.
Coops.) gives a good ground for establishing results-
oriented mechanism
• No bureaucracy- decision making is based on consensus
• Presence of membership organizations within the
Alliance gives better legitimacy to the Alliance
• Accountability mechanisms of the membership-based
organization
8. Page 8
SECTION VI: LEARNING AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
• EU backing – both strength and weakness
• How to ensure sustainability
• Presence of efficient accountability mechanisms to
ensure legitimization of representation of constituencies
• Assess the limitations from the very beginning
(democratic status)
• Organizing around specific thematic area/s
• No formal voting procedures.
• Leadership should be based on mutually recognized
experience, expertise and reputation
• Strongly define constituencies
