A/HRC/44/43/Add.1 high. The Nenskra hydropower plant is an example of a project that has failed to gain acceptance from the local communities. 37. The planned construction of the Nenskra power plant (280 MW) – with a dam that is 130 metres high and a reservoir of up to three square kilometres – is one of 35 hydropower plants planned in the Upper Svaneti region. In order to understand the situation, the Working Group met with different stakeholders, including the promoters of the project, JSC Nenskra Hydro – a joint venture of Korea Water Resources Corporation and JSC Partnership Fund (a Georgian government agency). 38. In September 2015, the environmental and construction permits were issued on the basis of a number of environmental and social impact studies carried out by the company between 2010 and 2015. In 2016, international funders of the project, including the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, identified a number of gaps and set a number of conditions for their approval of funding. This forced the company to carry out supplementary studies, presented in 10 volumes, including a more robust social impact assessment, which were completed in 2017 and posted online. Changes were also made to the project to reduce the impact on pasture land. According to the company, the entire valley was consulted, including through door-to-door meetings, and the project would not result in physical displacement. In 2018, a complaint was filed with the Project Complaint Mechanism of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, alleging the failure of the Bank to comply with its Environmental and Social Policy regarding the project’s potentially significant impacts and harm on Svans as indigenous peoples, as well as on the livelihoods, health and general well-being of the impacted community, by accepting the lack of proper public consultations, as well as by approving a project that lacks proper impact assessment and mitigation measures.8 39. Despite the additional measures taken to comply with the standards of international financial institutions, the project remains highly contested. Similar to a number of other hydropower plant projects, there was a perception that consultations with communities were being conducted as a box-ticking exercise. However, the Government, in comments it provided to the Working Group, disputed that the level of participation was superficial and reported that affected communities had been consulted from early stages of the environmental impact assessment process, in line with relevant international and national standards. It also contended that the final construction permit was issued in 2020 on the basis of improved social and environmental parameters, as reflected in a number of environment and social studies carried out in accordance with Georgian standards and requirements of international financial institutions, including the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development and the Asian Development Bank. 40. Although the project might not directly result in the relocation of any communities, concerns were raised regarding the possible economic displacement and its disproportionate impact on women, whose incomes from traditional livelihoods could be lost because of the project’s impact on local forests. The loss of the local population’s source of income could also result in physical displacement. Civil society organizations also highlighted the impact of the Nenskra hydropower plant on Svan people who self-identify as indigenous, although the Government claims there are no indigenous peoples in Georgia. 41. The Working Group notes the information provided by the Government regarding the refusal to carry out two projects on construction and operation of hydropower plants in 2019. However, it remains concerned at the cumulative impact of all hydropower plant projects – whether implemented, halted or planned – on human rights and the environment, and at the level of information and meaningful participation of all relevant stakeholders, both in environmental impact assessment processes and throughout the implementation of projects. 8 See https://bankwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/nenskra-complaint_redacted.pdf. 9