Tbilisi Through Time

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.

Full text

Georgian Geographical journal 2022, Vol.2 (1) 62-72
Tbilisi Through Time
Mariam Tsitsagi
1
, 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–

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