







































Georgian Geographical journal 2022, Vol.2 (1) 62-72 

 

Tbilisi Through Time 
Mariam Tsitsagi1, Nino Kharebava2*, Dali Nikolaishvili2, Ia Kupatadze3, Lela Gadrani1 

Abstract 

Ancient cities have witnessed many changes throughout their long history. These changes have different 

underlying causes in different regions of the world. This paper discusses the urban sprawl of Tbilisi, the capital 

of Georgia, mainly from the beginning of the 19th century to 2020. Through analysis of historical materials, city 

plans, and old maps, layers of Tbilisi urban sprawl were created using ArcMap 10.8. Images of Landsat 5 TM and 

Landsat 8 OLI have been used to assess changes over the last 30 years. We compared the obtained data with the 

census data conducted during the study period, reconstructed the current social, political, and economic situation 

using historical sources, and finally determined in which period the urban expansion took place, the reasons for 

it, and how this expansion affected the natural and social environments of the city. 

Keywords: urban sprawl, urban expansion, Tbilisi, Georgia 

Introduction 

Cities are an integral part of the modern environment. It is estimated that by 2050, approximately 

50% of the Earth's population will live in cities and surrounding areas [1]. Urban areas are constantly 

changing in time and space, and different parts of the city are associated with different historical epochs. 

These changes are often included in the definition of "city" itself. For example, according to one 

definition, "cities are not things, cities are processes" [2]. It is therefore essential to study these 

processes. Archaeology and historical data provide information on the spatial transformation of cities 

[3], particularly urban sprawl, which is one of the accompanying processes of urban development. The 

character of sprawl varies by region, for example, in Europe and America, and there are also internal 

differences within Europe [4]. Many factors, such as population growth, land prices, transportation 

development, and political fragmentation [5], influence urban sprawl. As mentioned earlier, the factors 

and influences are different within the countries and regions. For example, the size of many European 

cities is growing faster than their populations, hence the growing demand for land around the cities [4]. 

Tbilisi is the largest and one of the oldest cities in Georgia. It is logical that, over 1500 years of 

existence, the development and configuration of the city have been linked to its land use and urban 

sprawl. Naturally, initially, but later intentionally, the city's structure has been formed and transformed 

through a series of brief interventions over time. These changes took place with varying intensities at 

different stages, and the main drivers also varied. Research on these issues has been conducted in the 

past, and studies on similar topics have been published [6, 7]. In the present study, we want to focus on 

and deepen our knowledge of the drivers and consequences of urban sprawl in Tbilisi over the last two 

centuries. 

The research aims to analyse changes in the urban area of Tbilisi through time to determine and 

identify the main directions and reasons for these changes. We will also explore how and why Tbilisi 

developed from a compact city into the urban structure it has today and what problems it may cause us 

in the future. 

Study Area 

Tbilisi, the capital city of Georgia, is located in the eastern part of the country, at the intersection of 

Eastern Europe and Western Asia, at 41°41′ N and 44°47′ E. The capital is situated on both banks of 

the Mtkvari River. The section of the Mtkvari River valley (Tbilisi depression) from Zemo Avchala to 

Ponichala is characterized by complex terrain. The height of the bottom of the depression varies in the 

range of 350–450 m asl, and its slopes reach 1500 m. In the north, it is bordered by the Saguramo Range, 

in the east and southeast by the Iori Upland, and in the south and west by the subranges of the Trialeti 

Range [8]. The city stretches *33 km along the Mtkvari River and occupies an area of 502 km2.  

 
1 Vakhushti Bagrationi Institute of Geography, TSU, Tbilisi, Georgia 
2 Faculty of Exact and Natural Silences, Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University, Georgia 
3 School of Technology, Ilia State University, Tbilisi, Georgia  

* Corresponding author: kharebava.nino@gmail.com 

 



Tsitsagi et al. Georgian Geographical journal 2022, Vol.2 (1) 

 
Figure 1. Changes in the area and administrative-territorial division of Tbilisi through time 



Tsitsagi et al. Georgian Geographical journal 2022, Vol.2 (1) 

Tbilisi has been mentioned as a city since 458 AD. The city is an important political, economic and 

cultural centre. The first urban growth of Tbilisi dates back to the 19th century, after Georgia became 

subject to the Russian monarch. The city became the seat of the new governor and viceroy; therefore, 

new European-style buildings, railways and roads were constructed inside the settlement. In the 1850s, 

Tbilisi was reinvented as an essential political, cultural, commercial and administrative centre in the 

Southern Caucasus. The city had significant growth under Soviet rule. The second wave of urbanization 

erupted in the mid-20th century, with an influx of labourers and the emergence of factories and other 

similar facilities. By the year 1990, 17.4% of the area of Tbilisi was an industrial zone. 

Methods and Materials 

There are many sources of information about Tbilisi, but most are not in digital format. This is 

especially true of old maps and city plans. It therefore became necessary to contrast the old cartographic 

sources with the modern basis. The research is based on old cartographic sources and current Remotely 

Sensed data. Several sources have been used in the study (Table 1). 

Table 1. Data used in research 

# Title Year Scale 
1 Plan of Tbilisi by Vakhushti 1735 1:500 000 5000m 

2 Plan of Tbilisi 1800   

3 New Plan of Tbilisi 1828   

4 Plan of Tbilisi 1844 1:4100 41.3m 

5 Plan of Tbilisi city and surroundings 1867 1:8400 84.3m 

6 Plan of Tbilisi city and surroundings 1887 1:11 300 113.7m 

 7 Plan of Tbilisi 1902 1:4100 41.3m 

8 Plan of Tbilisi 1913 1:8400 84.3m 

9 Plan of Tbilisi 1924 1:6000 60m 

10 Plan of Tbilisi (Scheme) 1934 1:8000 80m 

11 Topographic map of Tbilisi 1955 1:25 000 250m 

12 General plan of Tbilisi 1970 1:10 000 100m 

13 Landsat 5 TM 1988 1:3000 30m 

14 Landsat 5 TM 2010 1:3000 30m 

15 Landsat 8 OLI 2020 1:3000 30m 

 
At the initial stage, a 1: 25,000 scale map of Tbilisi and its environs, consisting of 19 sheets, is used 

as a cartographic basis. On this basis we have connected the maps and plans of the 19th-20th centuries 

(Vakhushti Bagrationi, the so-called "Verstovki", Soviet topographic and modern maps, space images), 

which are composed of different scales and projections, and what is also very important - different 

cartography development Levels. This circumstance created some problems in terms of GIS registration 

and object matching. On the one hand, the map overlay provided good accuracy, and on the other hand, 

the complete disagreement of the objects. This is especially true when there is a large time difference 

between maps and also differences in mapping methods, coordinate systems, distances, and/or 

projections. Here, we have identified the objects on the old plans, identified their modern matches, and 

"mechanically transferred" the information from the old cartographic sources to the new base. 

At the next stage, city plans were georeferenced. All maps were given projection WGS-84-38N. A 

green area and a built-up area were drawn from each map. In the next step, we defined the built-up and 

green areas from the Landsat 5 TM and Landsat 8 OLI images using the LULC classification. We used 

Google Maps and large-scale maps to evaluate the accuracy of the results. The oldest data at our disposal 

was the Tbilisi plan drawn up by Vakhushti Bagrationi in 1735. According to this plan, the contours of 

the then settlements of Tbilisi were determined, the city centre was defined and using this center we 

determined the direction and speed of the development for each subsequent period. All operations were 

performed in the program ArcMap 10.8. 

Data from various narrative sources were also used to identify and analyse land use patterns. This 

function was performed using both scientific sources and ancient data. The data in these sources were 

identified, compared and entered into the GIS database. 

All the above made it possible to identify the space-time changes of Tbilisi land use, cartography, 

and anthropogenic quality of the area. 



Tsitsagi et al. Georgian Geographical journal 2022, Vol.2 (1) 

Results and Discussion 

The processing of existing materials, ancient cartographic sources has shown that we can distinguish 

several waves of urban sprawl in Tbilisi over the past two centuries. We have selected five periods in 

total and the underlying main drivers of these changes (Table 2). During these periods, specific districts 

were formed, and city structures was transformed - the relief construction, changes in the 

hydrographical set, destruction of natural green cover, etc. It should be noted that the changes were 

different in different periods. 

 

Table 2. Stages of the urban expansion in Tbilisi 

 Period Districts2 Main drivers 

1 pre-     1800 Sololaki, Kalaubani, Abanotubani, 

Kharpukhi, Rike, Avlabari, former 

Vorontsovi 

Environmental factors; the 

terrain allowed for better 

protection of the city, Mtkveri 

river 

2 1800-1850 Chugureti, Vera, Mtatsminda, Isani, 

Ortachala, Krtsanisi 

Population growth; Turning 

Tbilisi into the geopolitical 

center of the Caucasus 

3 1850-1930 Nadzaladevi, Didube, Svanetis ubani, 

Kukia, Metromsheni, 8th Legion 

Settlement, Navtlughi, Saburtalo, 

Vake 

Population growth; Ongoing 

social reforms in the empire 

4 1930-1990 Lotkini, Sanzona, Dighomi, 

Vashlijvari, Vedzisi, Delisi Metro 

Area, Dampalo, Military City, 

Vazisubani, Varketili. 

Soviet period, 

industrialization, natural and 

mechanical population 

growth, increased demand for 

residential and commercial 

space 

5 1990-

present day 

The village of Gldani, Zahesi, 

mukhatgverdi, Telovani, Didgori, 

Dzveli vedzisi, The village of Digomi, 

Tkhilvani, Agaraki, Bagebi, 

Okrokana, Tskneti, Akhaldaba, 

Tsavkisi, Shindisi, Tabakhmela, 

Kojori, Kiketi, Betania, Kveseti, Didi 

Lilo 

Post-Soviet period, problems 

of IDPs as a result of the 

political crisis, increased 

migration from rural to urban 

areas, especially increased 

demand for residential and 

commercial space 

 

Until the 1800s, the Settlement of the Tbilisi was laid exactly where the channel of Mtkvari River is 

the narrowest, and the relief functioned as a natural barrier and allowed better protection of the city. 

Tbilisi was originally established as a compact city on both sides of the Mtkvari. However, it should be 

noted that the right bank of the Mtkvari was more populated than the left (Fig. 2). According to source 

analysis, economic activities, especially trade, were quite intensive during this period, which is 

confirmed by the caravans, hazelnuts, open and closed markets, food or household/agricultural markets 

reflected in the plans of Tbilisi in 1735 and 1800. It is also important to note the existence of a glass 

factory on the 1800 plan. However, the city was not infrastructurally equipped. Guldenstedt, who was 

in Tbilisi in the 1770s, also speaks about this. Tbilisi is characterized with narrow and disordered streets 

[9]. 

The essential peculiarities at this stage can be distinguished by three circumstances: 1) confinement 

by natural constraints; 2) The compactness of the city around the thermal waters was gradually being 

violated, and the river of development was already intersecting. Formation along the Mtkvari; 3) 

Existence of a significant area of green cover both inside the city and in its surroundings. There were 

gardens and vineyards in a large area. Thus, the city was characterized by a simple territorial structure. 

Thus, this period, the relief even served its original defensive function, and natural landscapes had not 

changed intensively, preserving a frame structure. 

 
2 Districts are listed under their current names 



Tsitsagi et al. Georgian Geographical journal 2022, Vol.2 (1) 

 

 
Figure 2. Urban sprawl in Tbilisi through history 



Tsitsagi et al. Georgian Geographical journal 2022, Vol.2 (1) 

1800-1850s. At the beginning of the 19th century, Georgia became a part of the Russian Empire. The 

stabilization of the political situation and the increase of the local function contributed to an      increase 

in the local population (Fig. 3). As a result, economic activity began to intensify. Tbilisi became the 

political, economic and cultural centre of the Caucasus, which increased the demand for residential, 

commercial, and industrial space, and led to urban sprawl. From Fig. 2, it can be seen that the city's 

expansion along the Mtkvari River was happening, and this trend was maintained throughout the 

nineteenth century. This expansion has been especially evident since the mid-nineteenth century. 

Carefully examining Figure 4, we can clearly see that sharp urban expansion began during 1809-1828. 

Between 1828 and 1844 the urban area doubled, as illustrated in Fig. 3. Based on the exact figure, it is 

evident that the reason for this was not a sharp increase in population. During this period, the 

construction of the current Isani District began, the settlement of Avlabari expanded, and urban 

expansion in the direction of modern Chavchavadze Avenue began. It appears adjacent to the river 

Mtkvari, parallel and transversely designed streets form rectangular quarters. At the same time, the 

architectural look of Tbilisi was changing: European-type buildings were emerging [10]. However, the 

development of new territories was slow. Due to the orography, the city could not develop equally in 

all directions, and it clearly took the form of length - along the river Mtkvari, to the north-west [9]. In 

contrast to previous development, for the first time, the relief became the primary reason why the city 

could not maintain its compact shape. However, as we mentioned in the first period, the city's situation 

did not improve in terms of infrastructure. It continued in the first half of the 19th century, which is the 

time that the linguist-orientalist Claprot said: "They can hardly reach each other." Also, the city's 

cleanliness was paid no attention. In History of Tbilis, we read, "the population of the city dumped all 

kinds of garbage wherever they could fly". Over time, however, they began to care about the appearance 

and communications of the city. The construction of squares began, which became permanent gathering 

places. 

 
Figure 3. Changes in population and built up area of Tbilisi 

A significant area was covered with greenery - gardens, vineyards, and vegetables during this period. 

At the beginning of the century, a German colony appeared in the area of Kuki - Alexanderdorf, which 

is now in the centre of the city. This name completely changed the existing network of winding streets 

in Tbilisi. A rectangular quarterly planning development emerged here. 

1850-1930s are characterized by an even greater scale of socio-economic development, which is due 

to three important circumstances: 1) Tbilisi became a city of attraction for foreign merchants and 

artisans [10], 2) The railway was built in the 1890s, which encouraged the growth of development in 

the old      area between the settlement and the railway line; 3) The capital became the most important 

educational center, where the first state university was founded (1918) and a number of educational 

facilities were opened; and 4) New bridges were built and for the first time mass urban transport 

("Konka") was put into operation. 

We observe from Fig. 3 that in 1844, compared to 1809, the population had increased by only 8,000. 

The picture is completely different between the data for 1844 and 1867. Data in Fig. 3 suggest that in 



Tsitsagi et al. Georgian Geographical journal 2022, Vol.2 (1) 

this case, too, the built-up area doubled in the given period, although, unlike the previous period, the 

population actually doubled. As can be seen from Fig. 3, between 1867 and 1887 the population doubled 

again, although the increase in built up area was not so large. At the same time, at the end of the 

nineteenth century, a wave of urban expansion shifted to the left bank of the Mtkvari, which is also due 

to the relief factor.  

The political processes developed at the beginning of the twentieth century in themselves have an 

impact on urbanization and comparing Figs. 2 and 3 indicates that from 1900 to 1934 the development 

grew very slowly. It should also be noted that population growth was more noticeable.  

As a result of all this, there were already many reasons to expand the city and become an urban object, 

which affected both the city and its suburbs - urban lands were taking the place of agricultural lands. 

According to Tbilisi plans, compared to 1844, in 1924, the border area increased almost three times 

(from 3 km2 to 8 km2) (Fig. 2). 

European-type buildings and industrial buildings were becoming more visible (for example, 

blacksmiths, either, soap, wood, and other factories, weapons factories, carpentry enterprises, 

blacksmiths, craftsmen, etc.). Although the northwest direction of the development continued to grow, 

the city's growth in the southeast direction toward Navtlughi was also significant. 

Despite the rapid development described above, during this period, a significant amount of the city's 

green cover was still preserved, even in the city's central districts. For example, in the settlement of 

Kukia, where intensive urban development began in the 1950s, there were still orchards and vineyards. 

It is noteworthy that fragments of gardens are still preserved in the form of parks. 

Another practical change would be observed in the fourth period, 1930-90s, which coincides with the 

rising period of Soviet rule. In terms of development, systematic urbanization was underway in Tbilisi 

at that time. An excellent example of this is the 1958-1960s construction of the Vazha-Pshavela quarter, 

with its wide streets and greenery. It should be noted that such urbanization      has not taken place from 

the initial development of Tbilisi to the modern period, although it differs radically from international 

best practices. The area does not stand out artistically, though there are more free spaces, green areas, 

and children’s play spaces [11]. 

 
Figure 4. Varaz gorge - before transformation and after transformation 

As the spatial needs of the city's inhabitants increased, so did the development of new areas - for 

housing, trade, enterprise, and communication. Accompanying this was the transformation of the 

natural environment impacting the relief, hydrography, and the landscape in general. An excellent 

example of this is the infrastructure work since the 1950s: the construction of riverbeds with large 

retaining walls and coastal roads, turning into collectors of rivers and dry ravines, etc., for example, 

Varazi Valley, where at present the river does not flow to the surface. (Fig.4.) [11]. 

This period can be conditionally divided into two parts. During the first half of the period, the built-

up area increased six times, and the population grewrapidly. This has its explanation. After the end of 

World War II, a strong wave of industrialization began in the country, followed by the cultivation of 



Tsitsagi et al. Georgian Geographical journal 2022, Vol.2 (1) 

industrial areas. The city's population grew rapidly, which increased the demand for housing and even 

promted the construction of new housing estates. During this period, the foundation was laid for the 

development of new neighbourhoods, particularly the existing agrarian areas in the current 

Metromsheni and Didi Dighomi settlements were transformed into a built-up area. The foundation is 

laid for the development of the territory of Didi Dighomi. During these twenty years, urban expansion 

shifted from the right bank of the Mtkvari to the left bank. In this case, the built-up area was expanded 

mainly at the expense of agricultural areas [12]. 

In 1934 Soviet authorities initiated the first master plan of Tbilisi, where the main priority was 

developing housing areas, regulating density, and improving the living conditions of city inhabitants. 

They proposed to develop the left and right banks of the river, but mostly the left bank. Industrialization 

and new factory development brought more people into the city, which needed accommodations. For 

this reason, new dwelling areas were constructed. Several new bridges were erected that improved the 

connectivity of both parts of the city. A new highway type road was proposed on both sides of the river, 

which also led to the city's further structural development. As mentioned in the research of [13], at the 

end of the 1950s, it was possible to see a significant shift to a new city structure. Soviet authorities 

initiated the micro-region development proposals. These were typical housing units      developed as 

micro-regions, with the slogan “faster and cheaper.” Every family had to have an independent dwelling 

unit, resulting in the construction of more housing units. 

During this period, Saburtalo and Dighomi areas were introduced as extensive mass housing areas, 

although not fully established as were, later on, Gldani and Temka areas. 

These processes became even more intense in the second half of this period. However, during the 

third master plan proposal (1949-1951- or 1950s), the group proposed expanding the city structure 

linearly and developing it toward the Tbilisi Lake, a man-made lake (created after the first master plan 

- 1934). The initial plan was to expand the city centre and connect the area to the newly developed 

housing near the Tbilisi sea. Unfortunately, this was never fulfilled.  

In the 1960s-70s, due to the relief, the Tbilisi master plan design proposed to build one-two level 

housing units along the slope in the Vake and Saburtalo areas. Unfortunately, due to high costs and the 

problem with population density, the idea was never realized. The Saburtalo area, mainly the 

Nutsubidze area, was designed and constructed as high-rise buildings on a very harsh relief. 

It should be noted that urban expansion was a more or less manageable process during this period and 

proceeded mainly according to pre-designed plans. In this particular case, we do not discuss how 

accurately these plans were implemented and the reasons for the failure to implement these plans to the 

end [14], which facilitated the construction of roads and connected certain areas of the city more closely. 

During this period, Vake and Saburtalo were connected, for which a specific section of the mountain 

slope was blown up, where Tamarasvili Street now exists. 

Urban expansion continued for the next 20 years. During this period, the current Mukhiani and 

Mukhiani villas area were added to the built-up area. The development of the territory of Didi Dighomi 

became incredibly intense. Urban expansion intensified in the direction of the Tbilisi Sea and the 

Ponichala area, and the construction of Vazha-Pshavela Avenue continued. Even in this period, active 

urban expansion on the left bank of the Mtkvari was taking place mainly at the expense of agricultural 

areas. 

In the 1980s, a wave of urban expansion swept across the right bank as well. The development of 

Nutsubidze plateau began, the built-up area increased in the direction of Vazha-Pshavela Avenue and 

Vashlijvari settlement. 

In the next, fifth stage(1990s-present-day), the situation changed dramatically. The political situation 

in Georgia has changed since 1990. At this stage, there has been no urban development strategy in the 

country [11]. From this period, the uncontrolled urban sprawl process began in Tbilisi. The political, 

social, and economic crisis after the collapse of the Soviet Union in the 1990s led to a decline in the 

country's population. However, from this period, the unorganized urban sprawl began, mainly at the 

expense of suburban agrarian areas. 



Tsitsagi et al. Georgian Geographical journal 2022, Vol.2 (1) 

In the 1990s, factories in Georgia ceased to operate, and many people in the regions lost their jobs. 

At the same time, cultural centres were closed. Lifestyle has changed radically. Consequently, migration 

to cities began - as a means of survival. In addition to industrial activities, trading was well developed 

in the cities, so the population found a solution by engaging in such activities. In addition to working 

within it, people need the cultural nourishment and hat the city has provided. This is evidenced by 

population statistics in rural and urban areas (Fig. 5). 

 
Figure 5. Dynamics of the rural and urban population of Tbilisi 

This process has been reactivated since the early 2000s. In this case, we can distinguish two directions: 

1. Replacement of low-rise housing in the central districts with multi-story buildings, as was the case, 

for example, in the vicinity of the Sports Palace; 2. Development of new territories. In this case, the 

process of urban expansion became particularly active in the areas of Didi Dighomi and Ivertubani near 

Lake Lisi. 

Although the population has shrunk since 2002 compared to 1989, urban sprawl is still underway. As 

a result, we have a city that stretches for about 33 kilometers along Mtkvari, which, in turn, increases 

the time spent on transportation and the demand for private cars as well. This is a big blow to the 

ecological condition of the city in terms of the quality of life in Tbilisi [15]. Consequently, the urban 

sprawl has presented in Tbilisi with negative effects, which does not make life here pleasant, although 

half of the country's population is concentrated in the capital. This fact has its logical explanation, 

although we will not dwell on this issue in this particular case. 

All of the above circumstances have their logical explanation. In 2003, the government leadership in 

Georgia changed, prompting significant reforms. This further affected the urbanization process. At the 

beginning of the 19th century, 2% of the country's population lived in Tbilisi, and as of January 2021, 

32% of the Georgian population resided within. This is relatively high, concerning the area of Tbilisi 

and causes congestion. It is interesting to consider what are the attraction factors when such numbers 

can even make life in the city uncomfortable. 

All this is due to the fact that, unlike in previous decades, providing for the vital needs of the 

population (primarily their food) no longer requires the involvement of large numbers of people in 

agriculture and other agricultural activities. Today, cities offer more opportunities to the population 

exempted from agricultural activities, especially the young. Tbilisi is a very difficult socio-economic, 

political, and cultural space. Consequently, it is the centre of numerous human activities, more access 

to education, employment, entertainment and various services, which attract migration from rural areas. 

In 2006, villages and suburbs joined Tbilisi. To review the statistics of rural and urban population in 

Tbilisi in 1994-2007. The number of rural residents was invariably 0.1 (thousand) men. In 2007, 28.3 

(thousand) men. This is related to the increase of borders. Until 2006, the area of Tbilisi was 356 km2, 

and from 2006 it was 502 km2, at the expense of the annexation of the bordering villages (Fig. 1). This 

fact has also affected the density and has moved to second place in the country with this figure, when 

the capital is experiencing a large workload overall. In addition, the growth of green areas is also 

observed at a time when construction is proceeding at a catastrophic rate. 

In terms of urban renewal, the left bank of the Mtkvari is more congested than the right, which is 

related to the old historical sites on the right bank, such as Old Tbilisi, where construction bans are in 



Tsitsagi et al. Georgian Geographical journal 2022, Vol.2 (1) 

place to preserve the appearance. It should also be noted that the city limits were raised from the right 

bank. 

Conclusion 

In conclusion, the situation in the villages and cities of Georgia creates a favourable environment for 

the urbanization "boom" (explosion) and overcrowding of cities, which means "mass" population 

approach to the city, primarily concerning Tbilisi. This creates problems such as unsystematic 

development and chaotic constructions, which negatively impact the natural environment and social 

conditions of the place. 

As for the social problems that have arisen, the problem of employment is created in a congested 

city. Unemployed people engage in illegal, sometimes criminal, activities. There is a significant social 

load, traffic jams, the problem of parking. 

In terms of the recommendation, we all need to talk about, proper urban planning is needed so as not 

to cause repeating problems for the citizens, and to make their living environment comfortable. It is 

also necessary to maintain more or less healthy natural environmental conditions. At the same time, 

attention should be paid to the retention of the rural population. This should be done not only by 

developing agriculture but also by developing the surrounding municipal centres, so that the population 

can at least partially receive the cultural or educational nourishment that draws them to the city. 

Competing interests 

The authors declare that they have no competing interests. 

Authors’ contribution 

M.Ts. and N. Kh. conceived of the presented idea. L.G. and I. K. performed the analytic calculations. 

D.N. took the lead in writing the manuscript. All authors provided critical feedback and helped shape 

the research, analysis and manuscript. 

Acknowledgements 

This research [PHDF-21-1242] has been supported by Shota Rustaveli National Science Foundation 

of Georgia (SRNSFG). 

Authors' note 

In the process of working on the article, the administrative boundaries of Tbilisi were changed once 

again. These are minor changes; thus, the update was not included in the article. 

 

References 

[1] Jin, J., Gubbi, J., Marusic, S., & Palaniswami, M. (2014). An information framework for creating a smart 

city through internet of things. IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 1(2). 

https://doi.org/10.1109/JIOT.2013.2296516 

[2] Varzi, A. C. (2021). What is a City? Topoi, 40(2). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-019-09647-4 

[3] Williams, T. (2014). Archaeology: Reading the City through Time. In Reconnecting the City: The Historic 

Urban Landscape Approach and the Future of Urban Heritage (Vol. 9781118383988). 

https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118383940.ch1 

[4] Oueslati, W., Alvanides, S., & Garrod, G. (2015). Determinants of urban sprawl in European cities. In 

Urban Studies (Vol. 52, Issue 9). https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098015577773 

[5] Brilhante, O., & Klaas, J. (2018). Green city concept and a method to measure green city performance over 

time applied to fifty cities globally: Influence of GDP, population size and energy efficiency. Sustainability 

(Switzerland), 10(6). https://doi.org/10.3390/su10062031 

[6] Van Assche, K., & Salukvadze, J. (2012). Tbilisi reinvented: Planning, development and the unfinished 

project of democracy in Georgia. Planning Perspectives, 27(1). 

https://doi.org/10.1080/02665433.2011.601611 

[7] Gadrani, L., Lominadze, G., & Tsitsagi, M. (2018). F assessment of landuse/landcover (LULC) change of 

Tbilisi and surrounding area using remote sensing (RS) and GIS. Annals of Agrarian Science, 16(2), 163–

https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118383940.ch1
https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098015577773
https://doi.org/10.3390/su10062031


Tsitsagi et al. Georgian Geographical journal 2022, Vol.2 (1) 

169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aasci.2018.02.005 

[8] Tatashidze, Z. (2000). Tbilisi. In Z. Tatashidze, K. Kharadze, J. Kekelia, & R. Khazaradze, Geography of 

georgia, Part 1, Physical Geography (pp. 200-207). Tbilisi: Metsniereba (in Georgian) 

[9] Meskhia, Sh., Gvritishvili, D., Dumbadze, M., Surguladze, A. (1958). History of Tbilisi. Tbilisi: State 

Publishing House for Children and Youth Literature 

[10]  Ukleba, D. (1989). The nature of Tbilisi and its surroundings. Tbilisi: Soviet Georgia. 

[11]  Movement DOCU, (2021). Urban sprawl. Film, Bakuradze, A., Qadagishvili, E. 

[12]  Gadrani, L., Tsitsagi, M., & Tielidze, L. (2019 Urban Landscape of Georgia (On the Example of Large 

Cities). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-77764-1_6 

[13]  Van Assche, K., & Salukvadze, J. (2012). Tbilisi: Urban transformation and role transformation in the 

post-Soviet metropolis. In Remaking Metropolis: Global Challenges of the Urban Landscape. 

https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203095485 

[14]  Asatiani N. (2015). Urban development problems in Georgia in 1960-1970. ARS Georgia, Series B. ISSN 

1512-4088 

[15]  Alpaidze, L., & Pace, R. (2021). Ecosystem Services Provided by Urban Forests in the Southern Caucasus 

Region: A Modeling Study in Tbilisi, Georgia. Climate, 9(11), 157. https://doi.org/10.3390/cli9110157 

 

 

 

 

 

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-77764-1_6
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203095485
https://doi.org/10.3390/cli9110157

