Key Takeaway
In Georgia, former factories are often viewed mainly as real estate. That can miss their most valuable assets: industrial power connections, water, road or rail access, warehouses, large production halls and a local history of technical skills.
According to BTU researchers, Georgia does not need to restore every old factory. It needs a system for deciding which sites can become modern manufacturing, logistics, SME production hubs, vocational campuses or mixed-use urban assets – and which sites are no longer economically viable.
An Old Factory May Contain Ready-Made Infrastructure
A new industrial project needs much more than a building. It needs clean ownership, utilities, transport access, environmental approvals, worker mobility and technical compliance.
Former industrial sites may already contain part of that infrastructure. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency notes that brownfields are often abandoned or underused properties whose redevelopment may be complicated by real or potential contamination, but many are located where transport and utility infrastructure already exists.
Georgia Already Has a Significant Industrial Base
BTUAI’s calculation based on Geostat data shows that mining, manufacturing, energy supply, and water/waste activities together generated about GEL 7.36 billion in turnover in Q1 2026, around 18.2% more than a year earlier.
Combined production value reached about GEL 6.14 billion, while employment was approximately 137.2 thousand.
Manufacturing alone generated GEL 4.61 billion in turnover, up about 15.4% year on year. Its production value increased by about 20.8%, while employment rose by only 0.9%.
This does not by itself measure productivity, but it illustrates how modern industrial growth can become more technology-intensive rather than employment-intensive.
New Industrial Life Does Not Mean Old Jobs Return
A redeveloped factory may employ fewer people than the plant that operated there decades ago. Modern production is more automated and often requires stronger technical skills.
Success should therefore be measured not only by direct jobs, but also by output, exports, local supplier participation, technical skills and wider regional activity.
Warsaw, Indiana: From Printing to Electric Vehicles
Slate Auto provides a current example. The company is building its production base in Warsaw, Indiana, on the campus of the former R.R. Donnelley/LSC Communications printing facility.
Slate says it will invest nearly USD 400 million in the factory and create more than 2,000 jobs, while preparing to begin producing its electric trucks later in 2026.
The lesson is not that an old building is automatically valuable. It is that a large industrial site with useful location and infrastructure can be adapted to a completely different production model.
Georgia May Need Industrial Passports More Than a List of Empty Factories
An investor needs more than an address. The real questions are ownership, structural condition, available power, environmental risk, heavy-vehicle access, rail connectivity, permitted use and the skills available nearby.
A standardized digital industrial passport could turn a theoretical asset into an investable proposition.
- Location, land area and ownership;
- Structural condition;
- Available electricity capacity;
- Water, wastewater and gas where relevant;
- Road, rail or port access;
- Environmental and contamination risk;
- Permitted economic use;
- Estimated redevelopment complexity;
- Local workforce and vocational skills profile.
A Cheap Building Can Become the Most Expensive Project
Brownfield redevelopment carries hidden costs. Contamination, asbestos, weak structures, inadequate power capacity or fragmented ownership can destroy the apparent financial advantage of an old site.
The correct comparison is therefore total redevelopment cost and time versus the cost and time of greenfield construction.
EPA and World Bank guidance both emphasize that intended use, environmental conditions, remediation strategy and financing need to be considered before redevelopment decisions are made.
For Regions, Time-to-Production May Be the Real Advantage
A region cannot compete for manufacturing investment only through cheap land. Investors also care about how quickly production can start.
A site with confirmed power, clear ownership, transport access and preliminary environmental assessment may be more competitive than a cheaper site that requires years of preparation.
This creates potential opportunities in industrially experienced cities such as Rustavi, Kutaisi, Zestafoni, Chiatura, Tkibuli, Poti, Kaspi, Khashuri and Gori. This is a directional list, not a claim that individual sites in these cities have already passed technical due diligence.
Domestic Export Growth Strengthens the Industrial Question
Georgia’s domestic exports reached USD 2.39 billion in January-June 2026, up 62.6% year on year. Domestic exports represented 61.7% of total exports. The merchandise trade deficit was USD 5.17 billion.
These figures do not imply that every new factory will substitute imports or export successfully. But they strengthen the case for asking whether Georgia can build investment-ready industrial capacity faster.
One Old Factory Can Become a Home for Many SMEs
Industrial reuse does not require one large investor. Large sites can be divided into shared production hubs where smaller manufacturers use common warehousing, laboratories, energy infrastructure, logistics services or vocational facilities.
For SMEs, shared infrastructure can reduce the capital required to start production.
An Illustrative Georgian Mini-Case
Imagine a regional city with a 25,000-square-metre former industrial complex. The municipality markets it simply by land and building price. An investor later discovers unclear power capacity, an ownership dispute on one section and no environmental assessment.
The same property becomes a much stronger investment proposition if it has a structural audit, ownership map, grid-capacity statement, preliminary contamination study, redevelopment range and local skills profile.
The building has not changed. The quality of information and investment readiness has.
What Georgia Should Do
- Create a national inventory of significant former industrial sites.
- Build standardized industrial passports for priority properties.
- Pre-screen ownership, structural and environmental risks.
- Classify sites by potential use: manufacturing, logistics, SME hub, vocational/technology campus or mixed-use redevelopment.
- Link redevelopment to a real industry, market and skills strategy.
- Start vocational training before industrial launch, not after it.
- Make public support conditional on transparent and measurable public benefits.
BTU Researchers’ Assessment
According to BTU researchers, the value of Georgia’s old industrial sites is not their age or historical symbolism. Their value is the time, infrastructure and economic optionality that a new investor may not need to recreate.
But preserving an obsolete building without a business model can be as irrational as demolishing an industrial asset without evaluating its modern use.
Georgia needs a triage system: reuse, convert, mix, demolish or replace – based on evidence.
Key Findings
- Georgia’s combined industrial activities generated about GEL 7.36 billion in turnover in Q1 2026.
- Combined industrial production value was about GEL 6.14 billion and employment approximately 137.2 thousand.
- Former industrial sites may contain valuable utilities, transport access and production space in addition to land.
- Slate Auto’s Warsaw project demonstrates how a former printing plant can be adapted for a new manufacturing model.
- Environmental, ownership and structural risks can eliminate the apparent cost advantage of reuse.
- Georgia’s domestic exports grew by 62.6% in January-June 2026 to USD 2.39 billion.
- A standardized industrial passport system could improve the investability of former industrial properties.
Why This Matters for Georgia
Industrial reuse connects manufacturing, regional employment, exports, urban regeneration and investment competitiveness.
For a small economy, the time and infrastructure required to launch a factory can be decisive. Where reuse is technically and economically justified, Georgia can recover value from infrastructure that was built for an earlier industrial era.
Conclusion
A closed factory is neither automatically a lost asset nor automatically a ready-made factory. Its value appears only after technical, environmental, legal and economic assessment.
Georgia does not need to save every old plant. It needs to know what each important site is, what it costs to return it to economic life, and which businesses can use it competitively.
For regions, a future competitive advantage may be not empty land, but a pre-assessed industrial site with power, logistics, clear ownership and a known workforce profile.
Data and Main Sources
- National Statistics Office of Georgia – Activities of Enterprises, Q1 2026.
- National Statistics Office of Georgia – Domestic Exports, January-June 2026.
- National Statistics Office of Georgia – External Merchandise Trade, January-June 2026.
- Slate Auto – Warsaw Manufacturing Facility and 2026 manufacturing update.
- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency – Brownfields redevelopment guidance.
- World Bank – Brownfield remediation and redevelopment research.
- Ministry of Economy and Sustainable Development of Georgia – legal framework for Free Industrial Zones.
- BTUAI Research Team – Georgia-focused analytical interpretation.
This material is analytical and educational in nature. It does not constitute financial, investment, tax or legal advice. Professional advice should be obtained before making a specific decision.
Prepared by the academic team of Business and Technology University and the BTUAI Research Team, Tbilisi, Georgia.