Rop 2005

MINISTRY OF EUROPEAN INTEGRATION
ROMANIA
D r a ft
REGIONAL OPERATIONAL
PROGRAMME
“REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT”
2007-2013
August 2005
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................7
1. SITUATION ANALYSIS OF THE ROMANIAN REGIONS ......................................13
1.1 Background information .......................................................................................13
1.2 Regional development characteristics and current trends ...............................17
1.3 Economic performance and growth potentials......................................................22
1.3.1 Regional economic development characteristics ...........................................22
1.3.2 Social indicators and employment .................................................................29
1.3.3 Regional Infrastructure – Quality of life..........................................................34
1.3.4 Tourism .........................................................................................................55
1.4 Socio-economic profile of the regions..............................................................59
1.4.1 Region 1: North–East Region........................................................................59
1.4.2 Region 2: South–East Region .......................................................................60
1.4.3 Region 3: South Region ................................................................................62
1.4.4 Region 4: South–West Region ......................................................................63
1.4.5 Region 5: West Region..................................................................................64
1.4.6 Region 6: North–West Region .......................................................................65
1.4.7 Region 7: Center Region ...............................................................................66
1.4.8 Region 8: Bucharest Region..........................................................................67
1.4.9 Structure of settlement ..................................................................................68
1.5 SWOT analysis ...............................................................................................69
1.6 Attractiveness of the Romanian regions ..........................................................71
1.7 EU support programmes and pre-accession instruments ................................73
2. REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES.....................................77
2.1 National strategic reference framework for supporting the balanced
development of the regions........................................................................................77
2.1.1 Analysis of the needs ....................................................................................77
2.1.2 The NDP 2007-2013 Regional Development Priority.....................................82
2.2 Objectives and development principles of the ROP.........................................85
2.2.1 Strategic objectives .......................................................................................85
2.2.2 Specific objectives of the Romanian ROP .....................................................86
2.2.3 Consistency with Community policies and horizontal objectives ....................90
2.3 Assessment of the expected impact of the programme ...................................93
Draft Regional Operational Programme of Romania – August 2005 2

2.3.1 Ex-ante evaluation of the Programme ...........................................................93
2.3.2 Key performance indicators...........................................................................94
3. THE PRIORITIES OF THE ROP ..........................................................................102
3.1 Priority 1: Improvement of regional and local public infrastructure.................109
3.1.1 Improvement and development of transport networks and related public
utilities..................................................................................................................109
3.1.2 Support of health care, public safety infras-tructure and social services ......115
3.1.3 Development and rehabilitation of education infrastructure .........................141
3.2 Priority 2: Strengthening of regional and local economies .............................151
3.3 Priority 3: Development of regional and local tourism ....................................163
3.4 Priority 4: Support for urban development .....................................................177
3.5 Priority 5: Technical assistance .....................................................................189
4. FINANCING PLAN OF THE ROMANIAN ROP.....................................................197
5. COMPLEMENTARITY WITH OTHER SF CO-FINANCED MEASURES ..............199
5.1 Complementarity with other programmes co-financed by the ERDF and the
ESF 199
5.2 Complementarity with measures co-financed by the European Agricultural Fund
199
6. IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE ROP .....................................200
6.1 Introduction........................................................................................................200
6.2 Management......................................................................................................200
6.3 Monitoring and evaluation..................................................................................200
6.4 Financial management and control ....................................................................200
6.5 Information and Publicity....................................................................................200
6.6 Management Information System (MIS).............................................................200
ANNEX 1.....................................................................................................................201
Areas of operation and indicative projects ...............................................................201
ANNEX 2.....................................................................................................................202
Global Indicators for ROP 2007-2013 ......................................................................202
ANNEX 3.....................................................................................................................203
Ex-ante evaluation of the ROP 2007-2013...............................................................203
ANNEX 4.....................................................................................................................204
Flowchart on financial management and control ......................................................204
ANNEX 5.....................................................................................................................205
State aid table..........................................................................................................205

ANNEX 6.....................................................................................................................206
Statistical tables & maps..........................................................................................206

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
ARIS Romanian Agency for Foreign Investments
BSS Business Support Structures
CEE Central and Eastern European Countries
EBRD European Bank for Reconstruction and Development
EC European Commission
ECA Europe and Central Asia
EDIS Extended Decentralised Implementation System
ERDF European Regional Development Fund
ESC Economic and Social Cohesion
ESF European Social Fund
EU European Union
EUR EURO
FDI Foreign Direct Investment
GDP Gross Domestic Product
GDRD General Directorate for Regional Development (MEI)
GS Grant Scheme
HRD Human Resources Development
IB Intermediate Body
ICT Information and Communications Technologies
INS National Insitute for Statistics
IRIS Integrated Regional Information System
ISPA Pre-Accession Structural Instrument
JAP Joint Assessment Paper
JIM Joint Inclusion Memorandum
MA Management Authority
MAI Ministry of Administration and Interior
MARR Mining Affected regions Reconstruction
MEI Ministry of European Integration
MER Ministry of Education and Research
MLFSS Ministry of Labor, Family and Social Security
MOC Ministry of Culture
MOH Ministry of Health
MPF Ministry of Public Finances
MTCT Ministry of Transport, Constructions and Tourism
NASMEC National Agency for Small and Medium Enterprises and Co-
operatives
NBRD National Board for Regional Development
NDP National Development Plan
NGO Non-governmental Organisation
NIRDT National Institute for Research & Development in Tourism
NPAA National Programme for the Adoption of the Acquis
NUTS Official Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics

OP Operational Programme
R&D Research and Development
RAI Regions’ Attractiveness Index
RDA Regional Development Agency
RDB Regional Development Boards
RDI Research, Development and Innovation
RDP Regional Development Plan
ROP Regional Operational Programme
SAPARD Special Programme for Pre-Accession Aid for Agriculture and
Rural Develoment
SF Structural Funds
SME Small and Medium-sized Enterprises
SOP Sectoral Operational Programme
SWOT Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats
TAIEX Technical Assistance Information Exchange Unit
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
USAID US Agency for International Development
WB World Bank

INTRODUCTION
The Regional Operational Programme (ROP) “Regional Development” represents one of
the six programmes, which will be implemented under the EU Structural Funds (SF) and
the Agricultural Fund assistance in Romania in the period 2007-2013.
The five Sectoral Operational Programmes (SOP) are:
! Increasing Economic Competitiveness (co-financed by the ERDF)
! Transport Infrastructure (co-financed by the ERDF and the Cohesion Fund)
! Environment Infrastructure (co-financed by the ERDF)
! Human Resources Development (co-financed by the ESF)
! Agriculture, Rural Development and Fisheries (co-financed by the European

Agricultural Fund for Rural Development)
The Romanian ROP is presented in respect with the provisions on NUTS II and NUTS III
regions of the EC Regulation No. 1059/2003 on the establishment of a common
statistical classification of territorial units for statistics. It covers all eight (8) NUTS II
Romanian regions1, as follows:
Region 1: North–East Region
Region 2: South–East Region
Region 3: South Region
Region 4: South–West Region
Region 5: West Region
Region 6: North–West Region
Region 7: Center Region
Region 8: Bucharest Region
Romanian regions are non-administrative units, without legal personality. Nevertheless,

they represent the framework for drawing up, implementing and assessing the regional
development policy, as well as the economic and social cohesion programmes. The
regions represent the framework for collecting specific statistical data, according to the
European regulations issued by EUROSTAT for the NUTS II territorial level.
1
According to EGO No. 75/2001

NUTS classification of Romania
No of units
NUTS corresponding level Unit
(June 2004)
I Romania 1
II Development Regions 8
III Counties and Bucharest Municipality 42
All Romanian NUTS II regions demonstrate a per capita Gross Domestic Product (GDP)
of less than 75% of the Community average2. They are therefore all eligible for funding
from the Structural Funds under the “Convergence” objective, as specified in Art. 5
(Chapt. 3) of the draft General Structural Funds Regulation of July 20043. The ROP
regional coverage is illustrated in the map below:
The situation analysis of the Romanian regions and their socio-economic development
characteristics are analyzed in the chapter 1 of the present draft ROP document.
The priorities of the ROP have been specified by the Ministry of European Integration, in
partnership with the appropriate stakeholder organizations at national and regional level.
Broad involvement of a large and effective partnership with social and other relevant
2
Please refer to the analysis provided in chapter 1.2
3
Brussels, COM(2004) 492final, Proposal for a COUNCIL REGULATION laying down general provisions on
the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Cohesion Fund.

partners has been achieved through a wide consultation process with the following
authorities and bodies:
a) The competent regional, local, urban and other public authorities, including the
Regional Development Agencies;
b) The line Ministries and government agencies and in particular, the Ministry of Public
Finance (MPF), the Ministry of Economy and Trade, the Ministry of Education and
Research (MER), the Ministry of Health (MoH), the Ministry of Administration and Interior
(MAI), the Ministry of Labor, Family and Social Security (MLFSS), the Ministry of
Transport, Construction and Tourism, the Ministry of Environment and Water
management, the Ministry of Culture, the National Agency for Small and Medium
Enterprises and Co-operatives (NASMEC) and the National Institute for Research &
Development in Tourism (NIRDT).
c) The economic and social partners;
d) Other bodies representing civil society, environmental partners, non-governmental

organisations, and bodies responsible for promoting equality between men and women;
Donor organizations (EC Delegation, the World Bank, USAID, UNDP, EBRD) have also
been actively involved in the public consultations for the identification of the areas of
actions and the definition of the ROP interventions.
The public consultations organized by the MEI at national and regional level, ensured
broad and effective involvement of all the above bodies with respect of the principles of
transparency and access to information for all organizations concerned by the ROP
interventions, and the active dissemination of the information amongst the partners.
The partnership principle will also be promoted during the implementation of the ROP,
i.e. in financing, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of the assistance.
Throughout the implementation and evaluation of the ROP, the involvement of relevant
organizations at regional level in the project selection, will be ensured in order to select
those projects that are really beneficial for the regions and reply to the specific needs of
the priority sectors at regional level.
The ROP will be negotiated and adopted by the Romanian Government in …(act of
reference, date)… The programme will be submitted to the European Commission on
…(date).
The ROP framework is structured in four priorities and eleven sub-priorities/areas of

operations. One additional priority Technical Assistance includes three operations.

Structure of the Romanian ROP
Priority 1: Improvement of regional and local public infrastructure

1.1 Improvement and development of transport networks and related public utilities
1.2 Support of health care, public safety infrastructure and social services
1.3 Development and rehabilitation of education infrastructure
Priority 2: Strengthening of regional and local economies

2.1 Improvement/setting-up of business and RDI4 support infrastructure
2.2 Support and modernization of local and regional businesses
2.3 Support of business and innovation services
Priority 3: Development of regional and local tourism

3.1 Rehabilitation of touristic areas, renovation of historical and cultural patrimony,
protection/rehabilitation of natural heritage
3.2 Support of tourist income generation activities
Priority 4: Support for urban development

4.1 Integrated actions of urban regeneration
4.2 Environmental friendly transport infrastructure, related public utilities and urban
public services
4.3 Rehabilitation of in situ5 brownfield areas for development of new activities
Priority 5: Technical Assistance
All proposed ROP priorities are in line with the renewed Lisbon strategy and the EC
cohesion policy, including actions that promote growth, competitiveness and
employment. It is developed in accordance with the principles of the “Convergence”
objective of the EC Structural Funds. It respects the Community strategic guidelines and
the national strategic reference framework for regional development, incorporated in the
Romanian NDP 2007-2013.
The sixth development priority of the National Development Plan (NDP 2007-2013) of Romania,
refers to “Supporting the balanced development of all Romania’s regions” and includes the
analysis of the priority objectives for the “promotion of a balanced territorial development by
creating the conditions for the diminishing of the inter and intra-regional disparities, stimulating
the areas and towns lagging behind, as well as the ones with economic growth potential”.
The specific objectives of the strategy are:
4
Research, Development and innovation
5
In situ brownfiel areas contain abandoned insdustrial areas as well as underused/unused plots of land
within cities

1. Increase the competitiveness of regions as business locations
2. Supporting the regional/local economies affected by industrial restructuring or traditionally
underdeveloped
3. Capitalize on the touristic and cultural potential of the regions and increase these fields
contribution to the regions’ development
4. Rehabilitation of the small and medium size urban centers, with economic growth
potential in order to become regional development poles
5. Strengthening the capacity of local authorities in the field of programming and
development management
6. Promoting territorial co-operation at interregional, cross border and transnational level
Chapters 2 and 3 of the present document provide with a more in depth presentation of
the regional development strategic objectives, which form the basis of the development
principles of the ROP and an analysis of the ROP priorities and areas of operations. A
more detailed analysis of the ROP operations and indicative projects is included in
Annex 1.
The financing of the ROP will be provided from the European Regional Development
Fund (ERDF), the EU contribution representing 75% of the public expenditure. The
Romanian state will co-finance 25% of the total expenditure of the actions by public
sources from the state budget and from the budgets of the counties and municipalities.
The ROP financial tables are presented in chapter 4 of the present document.
The draft ROP incorporates the comments and recommendations from the ex-ante
evaluation, the environmental impact assessment, the inter-ministerial and inter-regional
consultations, and the round tables organised for the public by the Center for Community
Work. The ex-ante evaluation of the draft ROP is included in the Annex 3.
According to Governmental Decision No. 402/23.03.2004, the Managing Authority for the
Regional Operational Programme is set up within the structures of the Ministry of
European Integration. The Managing Authority is built up from the Directorate General
for Regional Development, together with the eight Regional Development Agencies
(RDAs) that have been set up under the Law No.151/1998 regarding the regional
development in Romania. The Intermediate Bodies for the implementation of projects
under the Regional Operational Programme are designated within the eight Regional
Development Agencies according to the acquis communautaire on Chapter 21 –
Regional policy and co-ordination of structural instruments, in force on 31 December
2003. The same document also specifies the involvement of all other institutions (as IBs
or as Implementing Agencies) to which the RDAs will delegate the task of managing
sub-priorities/operations or deliver specialist measures under the ROP. These may be
different regional and local non-government bodies and institutions, such as:

! Government structures at regional level;
! County Councils/other regional/local entities (Communal Councils);
! Municipal Councils – urban regeneration packages;
! Local Chambers of Trade and Industry;
Additional bodies will be responsible for creating regional partnerships, particularly in

relation to the preparation of projects, including their co-financing and preliminary
environmental assessment, and for providing information and publicity about the
programme.
Management and implementation arrangements for the ROP will be analytically

presented in chapter 6 of the ROP document6.
6
This part of the draft ROP document will be developed at a later stage.

1. SITUATION ANALYSIS OF THE ROMANIAN
REGIONS
1.1 Background information

Romania is a country of a population of 21,8 million. 53.3% were located in the urban
areas in 20027. Its major cities are Bucuresti (1,926,334), Iasi (320,888), Cluj-Napoca
(317,953), Timisoara (328,148), Constanta (310,471), Craiova (302,601), Galati
(298,861). The country’s per capita GDP is of 7,000.00 euro, 31.4% of the EU-25
8
average (2004).
The Romanian population shows a continuous and steady decline since the beginning of
the 1990s. The current population of 21.7 million is by 95,1% less than the population of
22.8 million registered by the Census of 1992. The demographic decline is accounted
both by the negative natural growth rate9 and by important rates of external migration10.
The Romanian economy has continued to grow, with GDP growth in the year to the
second semester of 2004 being estimated by the National Institute of Statistics at around
6.6%. As a result of this positive trend, which is the largely due to higher exports and
growing domestic demand, the average growth in the year 2004 is of 8.3%. This is the
highest annual growth that Romania has experienced since 1990.
Evolution of GDP per capita
32
31
30
29
28 GDP per capita

27
26
25
24
1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006
Source: Eurostat
7
National Institute for Statistics.
8
Source: EUROSTAT
9
In 2003 the birth rate was 9.8%, the fertility rate was 1.3 children per 1 woman of fertile age, ans the
mortality rate was 12.3%.
10
External migration has been one of the factors that contributed to the decrease in population, generating a
negative balance of 270,000 persons in the period 1990-2002. Following 1990, when 96,900 emigrants
were registered, the number of emigrats gradually decreased to 10,700 in 2003.

The gross average salary is of approx. 200 EUR, with a net value at around 143 EUR,
when calculated at market exchange rates (2004). While tremendous economic
progress has been achieved during the last couple of years and the economic rebound
can now be regarded as credible, the main competitive advantage still rests with low
labour costs, and the economy is still highly reliant on low value added sectors.
Economic activity growth and investments are the means to boost development and help
grow prosperity. Activity rate is showing a steady high value, (54.8% in 2004) followed
by a fairly steady employment rate (50.4 in 2004). Unemployment rates remain
important, with values varying around 6-7% (7.1% in 2004, according to EUROSTAT).
Evolution of employment and unemployment rates
70 8
60 7
6
50
5
40 Employment
4
30 Unemployment
3
20
2
10 1
0 0
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
Source: Eurostat
The overall development policy of the Romanian government seeks to enhance

employment rates, in parallel with an intensive investment development policy. This is
seen as the best way to sustain growth and social cohesion.
Romania has a diversified economic base:
Structure of production % of Gross Value Added

2001 2002 2003 2004
- Agriculture 13.3 11.4 11.7 13.0
- Industry (excluding construction) 27.7 28.1 27.3 27.0
- Construction 5.3 5.8 6.0 6.1
- Services 44.5 45.3 44.7 44.1
Source: National Institute for Statistics

As regards employment, more than employment growth (of –0.7% in the period 2002-
2004 accordin to the NIS), it is the sectoral pattern of employment that has to be taken
into consideration in planning for the future. The largest sector in Romania is the service
sector, which accounts for 36% of Structure of employment, 2004
employment in 2004. Industry and
agriculture present a chare of 29%
and 35% respectively.
Agricultur
Occupational mobility shows for Services e
36% 35%
Romania a process of de-
industrialization and of ruralization,
accompanied by a slight increase in
tertiary activities as the main refuge
Industry
for a population laid-off from former 29%
industrial activities.
From the employment structure of

the population by the main sectors of activities (primary, secondary and tertiary) it can be
deduced that Romania is still in an early stage of industrial development, and only about
36% of the population is involved in the tertiary sector compared to about 50% in
developed economies.
Whilst employment in industry remains stable, we observe a steady trend for fewer jobs
in the agricultural sector and a parallel increase of the services. This situation can be
expected to continue into the future. Employment in the primary sector may decline,
while service sector employment is expected to expand, more particularly in the areas of
tourism and trade. Employment growth can be expected in the transport and
communications sector, as well as in industry, in connection with eventual new
investments in these sectors. Construction sector employment is shown as an
expanding sector (5.2% in 2004 compared to 4.0% in 2001), but this sector is very much
cyclical in nature.
A degree of variability across the regions is however to be taken into consideration. The
bulk of employment is still concentrated in the impoverished North East Region, which
also has the largest share of agricultural employment. A shift in the structure of
employment is gradually under way, as services are gaining a prominent position in the
South East region, home to the country’s largest ports and fastest growing cities
(Constantza and Galatzi) and strengthening their position in regions such as the West
and the North West. Even in the predominantly agricultural South a more balanced
distribution of employment starts to emerge, though seasonal variation may still give

agriculture more importance in the later quarters. Bucharest has the only service
oriented economy, but it also apparently has a lower employment rate than other
regions, mainly due to the fact that agriculture can no longer be used to conceal
unemployment. This makes the North East and the South West the most agriculturally
oriented regions taking into account the structure of employment and also points to their
high impoverishment as agricultural employment often coincides with low productivity
and low-income employment. The Central region of Romania still remains home to the
largest concentration of industrial employment.
Major economic sectors’percentage share in total employment by region (204)
80
70
60
50 Agriculture
40 Industry
30 Services
20
10
0
er
S
NE
SE
t
SW
NW
es
nt
ar
Ce
ch
Bu
Source: National Institute of Statistics, EU Employment observatory

1.2 Regional development characteristics and
current trends
Regional development policy in the History of Regions in Romania*
traditional EU sense is a relatively The very first attempt to create a framework for regional
development dated back in 1872 when the law establishing
recent and rather formal concept for Counties (judete) allowed inter-county co-operation for
matters of temporary common interest such as joint
Romania. It is only since 1998 that the development projects. Since 1925 it was envisaged that
Country has been structured into eight Counties could permanently associate into Managing
Councils to carry out joint activities. These Managing
Development Regions (NUTS II) Counties then became Administrative Regions/General
County Associations with legal personality and own financial
grouping the 42 existing administrative resources in an attempt to improve policy delivery at the local
level through de-concentration and decentralisation. At the
counties (judets). The regional same time regional branches of the National Ministries were
also established to counterbalance increased devolution of
development law no.151/1998 was powers at the local level. The unclear division of
responsibilities between the two levels of Government led to
aimed at defining “the institutional huge inefficiencies and overlapping of responsibilities. To
framework, the objectives, the address this, in 1938 a major constitutional reform led to the
creation of 10 Governatorates partly composed of locally
competencies and tools for regional elected bodies and partly of Government appointees under
the supervision of a Government appointee to allow an
development policy, with the purpose of integrated approach to regional development but the war de
facto brought to a halt the implementation of such a reform.
diminishing unbalances and stimulating
In the immediate after-war period socialism provided a new
balanced development”. Development momentum to regional development policy by creating 28
administrative regions with a clear economic development
regions were defined based on a series mandate. The number of regions was therefore first reduced
to 18 in 1952 and to 16 in 1956. The establishment of regions
of statistical indicators taking into was accompanied by the creation of administrative raions in
line with the Soviet tradition for the provision of public
account similar economic and social services at the local level.
profiles, as well as inter-county In 1968 the existing regions were disbanded together with
their economic development responsibilities and counties
communication infrastructure. The eight were re-established as the pillar of local government
institutions. Since then the institutional framework at the local
regional development regions have a level has hardly changed and the number of counties has
only slightly increased from 39 to 41 plus another de facto
non-profit organization status. Their one. This structure remains the present basis of Romanian
main mission is to develop regional territorial-administrative organisation as defined by the
Romanian Government in 2002.
policies, reduce poverty and provide In 1998, through a EU-financed Phare project, Development
economical and substructure Regions with no legal personality have been created. They
have resulted from a massive voluntary association process
development support. By law, the requiring on average some 400 decisions from local councils
in each development regions. The implementation of
Local Council is the main authority of Development Regions has allowed Romania to comply with
the requirements of the European acquis and in particular
the local administration. with the Nomenclature of Territorial Units, as Development
Regions became the natural candidates for NUTS II status. At
The Law on regional development in the same time the first structural-type funds have been
managed at the regional level, as well as a number of
Romania (no 315/2004) currentlty regional economic and social cohesion policies.
represents the basic legal and *The information reported here is taken from Valeria Paola
Valeri Regiunile Administrative in Istoria Romaniei 1862-
institutional framework for regional 2002.
policy. Among others, it specifies the functioning of the structures involved in the
elaboration, management and implementation of regional policy and programmes,
including the role and attributions of the Regional Development Boards and of the
National Development Board as broad partnership structures supporting and
coordinating the process of elaboration, management and implementation of the
Regional development policy, and the attributions of the eight Regional Development
Agencies.
National Board for Regional Development (NBRD)
In order to accomplish the national policy objectives for regional development, a National
Board for Regional Development (NBRD) has been established in 1998. This is a
deliberative body, without legal personality which approves the National Strategy for
Regional Development and the National Programme for Regional Development,
priorities for financing within the National Fund for Regional Development (NFRD), the
criteria of eligibility and selection of the investment projects to be financed from this fund,
as well as the utilisation of the pre-accession funds allocated to Romania by the
European Commission, in accordance with the legal provisions in force.
This body includes presidents and vice-presidents of the Regional Development Boards
constituted at each Development Region level and, at parity with these, representatives
of the Government, designated by a Government Decision Holding responsibility for
coordination of regional development policy, strategies and programming, the NBRD
submits to the Government proposals on the establishment of the NFRD and pursues
the accomplishment of the regional development objectives, also within the framework of
the national and international co-operation activities, among development regions,
including at Euro-regions level. The executive body of the NBRD is the Ministry of
European Integration.
Regional Development Boards (RDBs)
In order to co-ordinate and follow up the necessary activities to attain the objectives of
regional development policies, Regional Development Boards have been established in
each Region as deliberative bodies. They comprise the County Council Presidents of
counties associated within each region, plus representatives of the local municipal, city,
and communal councils. RDBs are entrusted with strategic decisions concerning
programming and implementation of regional policies in their region. To this end, RDBs
approve the regional programming documents and the use of the Regional Development
Fund in terms of criteria for selection of projects, priorities, and the destination of the
resources. RDBs have also to monitor the correct use of funds.

The role of the Regional Development Boards in implementation will be coordinated with
the role of the National Board for Regional Development, the national Steering
Committee and the sectoral sub-monitoring committee coordinated by the Ministry of
European Integration.
In particular, Regional Development Boards play an important role in implementing the

Economic and Social Cohesion Programme by:
! Approving the specific objectives and priorities in the use of funds, along with the
priority areas within the regions in view to concentrating Phare funds.
! Approving the list of small and medium enterprises, social services and small-
scale infrastructure projects
! Approving the list of institutions selected to receive assistance at regional level.
Regional Development Agencies (RDAs).
Within each region, a Regional Development Agency (RDA) has been set up, co-
ordinated by the RDB. The RDAs are non-governmental, non-profit, public utility bodies,
having legal personality. They act within the regional development field, representing the
executive body of the Regional Development Board. The RDAs have the following main
attributions: the drawing up of the programming documents of the regions and their
implementation once they have been approved by the RDB; submission of proposals to
the RDBs on the projects to be financed from the Regional Development Fund,
established for each region; submission of proposals for projects on a larger scale to the
co-ordinating institution at the national level, in order for these to be financed from the
National Fund for Regional Development; initiating measures to attract supplementary
financial resources to the Regional Development Fund; monitoring, from the technical
point of view, the development projects carried on in the development regions ; acting as
Implementing Authorities for the Phare Programmes - the Economic and Social
Cohesion Component.
The Regional Development Agencies (RDAs) ensure the implementation of the regional
development programmes funded by Phare – social and economic cohesion component-
on the basis of the criteria adopted by the Romanian Government and the European
Commission.
***
Romanian regions historically present disparities at the level of their economic

development. Forced industrialisation of certain areas and other countervailing policies

including mandatory migration of the population from rural areas into towns were for long
years, part of the policies aiming at achieving a balanced development of the regions. In
the transition period following 1989, and the predominance of market oriented economy,
regions have shown an important degree of differentiation in their development. This
reinforced the need to setting up special polisied to promote a balanced participation of
all Romania’s regions to socio-economic development. The broader economic context,
which regional development policies have to take into account, is characterized by:
! a high or very high share of employment in agriculture, often related to semi-

subsistence farming;
! the need to restructure several regional industries and in particular the traditional
mining areas and some oversized State-owned heavy industries;
! the very low accessibility of certain geographical areas, that results in low
attractiveness and low investment.
Demographical factors also put pressure on local labor markets, with an important rate
of ageing population and migration in a number of Romanian regions, resulting to low
reproduction rates and lab our force participation.
The main current regional development features in Romania, can be summarized as

follows:
(a) Bucharest is more and more presenting the characteristics of a metropolis of

increasing Central European importance, such as Budapest, Sofia and Belgrade. The
considerably growing importance of Bucharest region in terms of economic development
is one of the most notable features of Romania’s economic development over the last
ten years. In 1995 Bucharest-Ilfov (being the wealthiest region of the country) had an
average income roughly 1.7 times the poorest Northeastern region. According to the
latest available data, this ratio has increased to 3. With slightly more than 5% of the
population of Romania, Bucharest accounts for over 20% of GDP and 20% of the
Country’s entrepreneurial basis11. So far the capital has attracted more than half of total
Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) and has also been one of the few areas experiencing
substantial positive internal migration.
(b) The country’s economic activity is concerntrated around a network of large and
medium sized towns whose size, economic importance and functional scope goes or
should go beyond their immediate vicinity. However, so far relatively high FDI levels are
registered in counties of South-East, South, West and North West regions. There are
11
Measured as a share of registered SMEs on the total.

growing signs of structural underdevelopment in several other regions and many
traditionally important towns are losing active population. Another important
characteristic is the limited links between growth centers in the same region, which
results to the absence of regionally structured lab our markets and important levels of
migration to Bucharest or abroad.
(c) The EU accession process radically changed the role external borders play in
regional development by opening new opportunities and reinforcing old constraints.
New opportunities have risen, with potential for cross-border relationships with
neighbouring Central European countries (i.e. Bulgaria, Serbia & Montenegro) and for
further strengthening economic links between Transylvania and Hungary. Moreover, the
future porition of northern and eastern Romanina regions as EU external border regions,
cregenerates the need for the creation of special economic development conditions in
the regions of the Danube Delta and in the northern counties bordering with Moldova
and Ukraine.
(d) Poverty and social exclusion risks are still high and their rates are variably distributed
among the Romanian regions, regional disparities being correlated to the ones related to
the economic development of the regions. According to the World Bank, poverty
incidence is particularly high 1) in the Northeastern region in general, where there is a
high concentration of farmers, 2) in rural areas, as farmers account for 16% of the poor
with an incidence of almost 60% per cent, 3) among the unemployed (11% of the poor
and 70% poverty incidence) and among the Roma population (7% of the poor and 90%
poverty incidence). Family factors, educational attainment and a pensioner status are
other, non-geographically correlated variables. Most Romanian rural areas combine low
accessibility, low population density, a very high share of employment in agriculture, a
disproportionately high ageing population, a poorly qualified workforce and a total lack of
local attractiveness for investment resulting in practically non-existing local employment
opportunities. Same characteristics are shared by the declining industrial areas
characterized by a limited attractiveness for private investment, a poorly qualified and
aged workforce and little or none alternative employment opportunities. Moreover these
urban centers are typically low profile and lack urban functions especially in the service
sector. One of the peculiarities of the Romanian situation is the patchy distribution of
these areas all over the country. Within the regions heavily agricultural counties coexist
with more industrial ones. From county to county within the same region unemployment
levels can range from as low as some 4.5% to as high as 11%. The share of people
living on agriculture on the various areas can dramatically vary from 10% to almost 60%.
The existence of a substantial number of declining mono-company towns complete the
picture.

1.3 Economic performance and growth potentials
1.3.1 Regional economic development characteristics12

The change in Gross Domestic Product shows an up trend between 1998 and 2004, as
stated in the Statistic Yearbook. The same pattern was followed by GDP per capita and
private sector contribution to GDP.
13
GDP, GDP per capita, share of private sector
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
Gross 373798.2 545730.2 803773.1 1167687.0 1514751.0 193354.0 2387914.0

Domestic
Product
(billion lei)
GDP per 16611.2 24300.0 35826.4 52109.4 69501.0 87577.0 110178.0
capita (000
lei)
Weight of 61.4 63.7 65.6 68.0 69.4 70.4 70.8
private sector
in GDP (%)
Source: National Institute of Statistics
The up trend change maintained through 2004 when, in real terms an increase of 7.97%
against 2003 was observed.
Weight of economic sectors in GDP
In terms of the contributioin of
60
the economic sectors in
50
Romania’s GDP between 2000 2000
40
2001
and 2004, slightly decreases
30 2002
are observed in services and 20
2003
2004
agriculture while constructions 10
and industry show slight 0
Services Constuction Industry Agriculture
upward trend.
In terms of regional distribution of GDP, in 2002, Bucharest, with 319,749.5 billion lei,
representing 21% of the total, is ranked first, far ahead all the other regions, which count
from the lowest 9% (South–West) up to 13% (Center), whilie North-East, North-West
and South regions present a GDP share of 12%. However, on a per capita basis, the
12
Data presented in this paragraph is based on NIS and EUROSTAT publications, and on calculations by
the authors.
13
Source: NIS

rank is presenting differenciatioins from the
GDP values, in the sense that region North-
East, ranked among the regions placed
second on GDP amount basis, is ranked
last on the per capita basis. This is coupled
by a high unemployment rate (16%). On the
contrary, region West which was ranked 7th
on the GDP basis, is 2nd on a per capita
basis, showing together with region Center

a growth pole potential. However, West
region unemployment rate (7%) is around
the national average (7.1%).
As a result of improving the

macroeconomic conditions and economy
revitalization, the unemployment rate
decreased over the years, from a total of
8.4 % in 2002 to 7.4% in 2003 and 7.1% in
200414.
The regional distribution of unemployment

rate in 2002 ranges from the lowest 2.8%
registered in Bucharest up to 9.1%
recorded for North-East region, where the
GDP per capita is the lowest.
In Foreign Direct Investments (FDI), the situation in Romania for 200315 is as follows:
Region FDI in million euro, 2003 % if total FDI
Bucharest-Ilfov 5471,1 53,9
South-East 1107,7 10,9
South 846,1 8,3
West 751,9 7,4
North-West 676,9 6,7
Center 644,6 6,3
South-West 360,5 3,5
North-East 300,8 3
TOTAL 10159,6 100
14
Source: EUROSTAT
15
Source: National Bank of Romania, NIS

As seen in the table above, the majority of FDI is directed to the Bucharest-Ilfov area.
The countries in the top 5 places are, Holland 18,6%, Greece 11,4%, France 11,4%,
Italy 7,8%, Germany 7,2%, and Austria 6%.
In 2002, the total number of active enterprises was 322.188, out of which 2372 were
large enterprises with over 250 employees.
The regional distribution of

those enterprises, as Regional distribution of active
shown in the following
enterprises by size in 2002
graph, shows a massive 100%
concentration in Bucharest 90%

80%
which counts for 70%
approximately 21.4%, 60%

50%
followed by North-East 40%
region with 13.7 % and 30%

20%
South-East and Center with 10%
over 12%. It also can be 0%

North-East South-East South South-West West North-West Center Bucharest
250 and over 294 265 311 212 239 311 332 408
noticed that enterprises 50-249 1057 1009 1038 598 975 1116 1214 1649
10-49 3944 3577 3504 2198 3346 4664 4562 6486
with less than 10 0-9 32239 36242 31544 23367 24256 37948 32947 60336
employees, account for

86.56%.
The same situation prevails over the regional gross investments of active enterprises,
per capita, in 2002, as shown in the table herewith:
REGIONAL GROSS INVESTMENTS OF ACTIVE ENTERPRISES IN 2002
(per capita basis)
Gross
Gross
Gross Investments Investments
Population Investments
Region (billion lei) (million lei)
(Euro) per capita
per capita
Bucharest 110554 2226457 49,7 1551,7
South-East 59867 2848219 21,0 656,8
West 39204 1958648 20,0 625,5
TOTAL 409324 21680974 18,9 590,0
Center 46465 2523021 18,4 575,5
South-West 34171 2330792 14,7 458,1
North-West 38411 2740064 14,0 438,1
South 44463 3379406 13,2 411,2
North-East 36189 3674367 9,8 307,8

As to the Venture capital investments indicator16 for enterprises at early stage shows a
decreasing trend from 2000 to
Venture capital investments - early
2003, for all compared stage (as a percentage of GDP)
countries, except Poland. 2000 2001 2002 2003
EU (15 countries) 0.075 0.045 0.029 0.021
In the field of Research &
Euro-zone 0.07 0.039 0.024 0.015
Development17, the situation in Euro-zone (12
the total number of patents – countries) 0.069 0.039 0.024 0.015
Poland 0.023 0.012 0.005 0.009
supplied to the European Patent
Romania 0.003 0.004 0.005 0
Organization – per million of Hungary 0.003 0.027 0.003 0
population, which for Romania is Slovakia 0 0.012 0.003 0
0.20, while the EU 25 is 108 and Czech Republic 0.026 0.01 0.001 0.001
4.42 for the newly accessed countries. The number of patent applications submitted to
the corresponding US organization is for EU 15 11.24 per million inhabitants, while for
Romania and the CEE18 is 0.04 and 0.18 respectively.
The R&D expenditure in the Business enterprise sector, as percentage of GDP, shows a
substantial difference in R&D spending among Romanian regions, for the year 2002.
Romania, in total, spends one fifth of what is spent in the EU 15, and half of what is
spent in CEE 10. The region of Bucuresti, though, spends slightly more of what is spent
in the CEE 10, and “only” half of what is spent in the EU 15. This leaves the rest of the
regions way back, with the exception of Sud. The trailing regions – except Sud – spend
from 1/8 to 1/13 of what is spent in the EU-15, from 1/3 to 1/5 from what is spent in the
CEE-10.
The R&D expenditure in the Business enterprise sector, as percentage of GDP, shows
that Romania, in total, still spends less than EU-15, and CEE-10, while the regions Sud
and Bucharest spend more than the CEE-10, and twice as much the national percentage
on GDP.
The indicator total R&D personnel as percentage of total employment, applying to all
sectors of the Romanian economy, also shows the large difference between the
16
Venture capital investment is defined as private equity raised for investment in companies; management
buyouts, management buyins and venture purchase of quoted shares are excluded. Data are broken down
into two investment stages: Early stage (seed + start-up) and expansion and replacement (expansion and
replacement capital). NB: GDP = Gross domestic product at market prices.
17
"Research and experimental development (R&D) comprise creative work undertaken on a systematic
basis in order to increase the stock of knowledge, including knowledge of man, culture and society and the
use of this stock of knowledge to devise new applications" (Frascati Manual, 2002 edition, § 63 ). R&D is an
activity where there are significant transfers of resources between units, organisations and sectors and it is
important to trace the flow of R&D funds.
18
Central and Eastern European Countries

Bucharest and the rest of the regions, resulting to affect greatly the average for
Romania.
The table herewith depicts the percentage on total employment by region of Research
and Development Personnel in the business enterprise sector of the economy. The
difference between Bucharest region and Total R&D personnel,
percentage of total
Sud-Est in the last place is considerably employment, in the business
Region enterprise sector
large, as, are also shown the regional (000)
disparities. Also, the same situation in 2002
human resources, is repeated, and there is Bucuresti 0.77
Sud 0.25
significant concentration of human
Centru 0.24
resources, in the field of Science &
Romania 0.20
Technology in the region of Bucharest, in Vest 0.11
Human resources in Science and Sud-Vest 0.10
Technology (% of total population), in Nord-Vest 0.09

Nord-Est 0.08
Human resources in Science and Sud-Est 0.08
Technology – Education (% of total
population), Human resources in Science and Technology (% of active population),
Human resources in Science and Technology – Education (% of active population), only
to be followed, in all cases, by the region Vest, which is slightly above the country’s
mean.
Adjustment to the Digital Economy is essential for enterprises to become/stay

competitive. A basic analysis on the use of ICT, gives the level of development in
Romania, as compared to the EU 15, EU 25 and CEE 10.
Overall, the percentage of enterprises

Percentage of enterprises, which use the Internet for
using the Internet to interact with public interaction with public authorities, 2004
authorities, in Romania, is shown in the Estonia 84
following table. (i.e. having used the Czech Republic 75
Poland 74
Internet for one or more of the following Lithuania 65
activities: obtaining information, EU (25 countries) 52
Euro-zone 51
downloading forms, filling-in web-forms, EU (15 countries) 49
full electronic case handling). The table Slovenia 47
Slovakia 47
shows that Romania is in the last Bulgaria 38
position, while Estonia is leading, being Cyprus
Hungary
35
35
even higher than the EU 15, and of Romania 31
course EU 25.

In the enterprise adaptation to ICT, we see that a typical breakdown by enterprise19 size
as to their share in having access to the Internet brings Romania in last place in the list
regardless the enterprise size. Leading the list is Slovenia, followed by EU 15 member
states. The following table is in descending order of all enterprises in year 2004:
Enterprise access to Internet
Medium enterprises Large entreprises
All (10 employed Small enterprises (10-
(50-249 employed (250 employed
persons or more) 49 employed persons)
persons) persons or more)
2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004
Slovenia N/A 93 N/A 91 N/A 98 N/A 100
EU (15 countries) 86 90 84 88 95 97 99 99
Euro-zone 87 90 85 89 96 97 99 99
Czech Republic 88 90 85 88 97 97 99 99
Estonia N/A 90 N/A 89 N/A 96 N/A 98
EU (25 countries) N/A 89 N/A 87 N/A 97 N/A 99
Poland N/A 85 N/A 81 N/A 98 N/A 100
Cyprus N/A 82 N/A 79 N/A 98 N/A 100
Lithuania N/A 81 N/A 77 N/A 91 N/A 99
Hungary N/A 78 N/A 75 N/A 87 N/A 97
Slovakia N/A 71 N/A 67 N/A 91 N/A 98
Bulgaria N/A 62 N/A 57 N/A 77 N/A 94
Romania N/A 52 N/A 45 N/A 67 N/A 90
In the use of ITC technologies, according to the initiative eEurope+, the percentage of
the workforce in Romania with working knowledge of common office programs, in
December 2003 was 21%, while EU 15 average was at 49%. Also, the number of
employees having used Internet in their workplace, in December 2003, the percentage in
Romania was 14%, while the EU 15 average was at 86%.
In IVT penetr, the perceation the percentage of companies with broadband access for
Romania in December 2003 is 10%, while the EU 15 was at 39%, and the average of
the Central and Easter European Countries (CEE 10) was at 21%, while, the percentage
of enterprises having a website/homepage is for Romania at 27%, compared to EU 15 at
57%, and CEE (10) average at 44%. Moreover, the percentage of enterprises whose IT
systems for managing orders or purchases that are linked automatically with other
internal IT systems, in December 2003 was 9% for Romania and the average of CEE 10,
while the respective EU 15 was at 26%.
According to Eurostat, the percentage of enterprises, which employ more than 9

employees, and have broadband access in 2004, is for Romania 13%, for EU 25 is 52%
and for EU 15 is 55%.
19
This indicator consists of enterprises with 10 or more full-time employees. The enterprises have their
main activity in NACE sections: D, F, G, H(groups55.1 - 55.2 only), I, K, O (groups 92.1 - 92.2 only),
EUROSTAT

Energy costs In Romania, electricity and natural gas prices are fairly expensive
compared to the rest of the newly accessed countries. Further analysis in the ratio of
before/after taxes, for the 1st semester of 2005, shows that, taxation becomes a factor,
making the two commodities more expensive. The increase in electricity prices, for
industrial users, between 2003-2004 is 15.27%, while between 2004-2005 50.85%.
Exceptions are the costs in the price of gas for industrial users, which fell by 2,83%
between 2004 and 2005.
Business Support Structures20: Difficult access to finance is the main concern of the
Industrial Parks, which participated in the consultation process. Another major issue
revealed by the parks is state bureaucracy, and infrastructure, which varies from utility
networks, buildings, to ICT. Despite the current situation, the Romanian Industrial Parks
do have plans to further promote the services they offer, optimize the current usage rate,
improve infrastructures, and offer more services and at the same time improve the
pricing policies they apply.
As to internal organizational needs, Industrial Parks do need assistance in improving

planning and organizational capacities, and the need for receiving more training.
The situation with Business Incubators is slightly different, yet, the consultation process
revealed that more problems are associated with extra building infrastructure, difficulty
access to finance, ineffective means to promote the incubators to potential users of the
service, lack of incentives for further development, and lack of qualified human
resources. When it comes to the future planning, the incubators plan to offer more
services, improve pricing policies, and apply operational and organizational structure
changes, all aiming at further development.
As to the internal organizational needs, Business Incubators do need to improve their

business operations (marketing, management, etc), and also receive more training.
The situation of the Technology Transfer Centers is rather weak. It is weak in terms of
being able to support technology in Romania and its linkages to the marketplace, in
terms of effective operation, and in terms of creating awareness of their existence and
role. Another issue arising is the fact that most of these business support structures are
situated in the Bucharest area, and this creates substantial disparities across the regions
of the country. These conclusions suggest areas of intervention with emphasis placed on
the regional distribution.
20
Source: Analysis of the existing situation for the Business Support Structures is based on the Consultation
process conducted in the framework of Romania’s ROP preparation, and used structured questionnaires,
and personal interviews through field visits

The lack of Science and Technology Parks, in conjunction with the low number – only
one operational– and level of performance of other technology and innovation related
entities existing in Romania are reflected in low-level innovation indicators in Romania,
at regional and national levels. Since only one Science and Technology Park is currently
operating in Romania, very little can be said about their operations.
For the Business Consultancy Centers, major problems are associated with
infrastructure, lack of qualified human resources, lack of knowledge in identifying
business needs, and high operating costs. At the same time, the centers do have
immediate plans as to enhancing their infrastructure, provide more training to personnel,
improve the services they provide, and launch promotional campaigns.
Commitment to their members and improvement of services provided are the key issues
pertaining to Business Associations consulted. While the level of ICT in these business
support structures seems adequate, the research team many times when attempted to
receive information from various associations, this was not always easy. Also, most of
them are located in the Bucharest area, they don’t have regional representation, so in
this aspect all support to their members is done long distance.
1.3.2 Social indicators and employment

Starting from 1991, the rate of growth
Population dynamics
of population has been negative. As it (Rates, per 1 000
can be noticed from the herewith, over inhabitants)
Population
the period 1991 to 2001 the population Growth Birth Death Natural
Year (mid-year,
Rate % rate rate increase
has decreased, usually by less than millions)
1990 23,2 13,6 10,6 3,0
0.3% per year, with the lowest growth 1991 23,18 -0,09 11,9 10,9 1,0
rate recorded in 1992, of -1.68% and 1992 22,79 -1,68 11,4 11,6 -0,2
2002 by 2.63%. 1993 22,75 -0,17 11,0 11,6 -0,6
1994 22,73 -0,09 10,9 11,7 -0,8
The fall in population is mainly due to 1995 22,69 -0,17 10,4 12,0 -1,6
1996 22,6 -0,39 10,2 12,7 -2,5
the negative natural increase recorded
1997 22,54 -0,26 10,5 12,4 -1,9
throughout the period 1991-2002 and, 1998 22,5 -0,17 10,5 12,0 -1,5
to a lesser extent, to the negative net 1999 22,46 -0,17 10,4 11,8 -1,4
2000 22,43 -0,13 10,5 11,4 -0,9
migration flows recorded up to 2000.
2001 22,4 -0,13 9,8 11,6 -1,8
2002 21,79 -2,63 9,6 12,4 -2,8
The negative natural increase is
Source: NIS (2004a)
caused by the decline in the number of
births per 1000 inhabitants, and by the rise in the number of deaths per 1000
inhabitants. Possible causes of the declining birth rate after 1990 are the social

insecurity produced by transition and the legalization on abortion. From the 8
development regions, in 2003, the highest birth rate is observed in the Northeast region
(11.5 live birth at 1000 inhabitants) and the lowest is in the west region (8.9 live-birth at
1000 inhabitants) and in Bucharest (8.3 live-birth at 1000 inhabitants).
On the other hand, the increase in death

Average life expectancy
rate is a result of the ageing process, as
Years Average life expectancy
the life expectancy remained relatively 1989-1991 69.78
constant at approximately 69 years from 1990-1992 69.52
1990, and exceeding 70 years from 1998. 1991-1993 69.48
However, this level of life expectancy is 1992-1994 69.40
considerably lower than the European 1993-1995 69.50
1994-1996 68.95
(EU-15) average, of over 75 years for
1995-1997 69.24
male and over 81 years for female in
1996-1998 69.74
2000. The larger number of deaths per 1997-1999 70.53
1000 inhabitants in rural areas can be due 1998-2000 71.19
to the different structure of population, 1999-2001 71.25
with a higher proportion of inhabitants 2000-2002 71.25
Source: NIS, Romanian Statistical Yearbook, 2003
older than 60 years (e.g. 24%, as against
14.4% in urban areas, in 2001). Furthermore, the life expectancy in rural areas remained
almost constant, lower by one year than the level recorded in the urban areas.
According to the Rank among neighbour states

graph presented Birth rate Death Rate Natural increase
herewith, which 25
presents Roma- 20
nia’s Vital Stati-
15
stics in Compari-
10
son with other
5
Eastern European
0
and Balkan Coun-
tries, Romania is -5
among the most -10

Moldova
Turkey
Czech Republic
Hungary
Norway
Slovenia
Slovakia
Rep. of Macedonia
Malta
Croatia
Poland
Bulgaria
Spain
Greece
Cyprus
Netherlands
Romania
Estonia
Portugal
Russian Federation
declining in
population states
in the wider region
of central Europe and Balkans.

Age distribution
According to the 2002 census and given the above-mentioned indicators, population in
Romania is in declining as well as in ageing process, a phenomenon that is however
common in the majority of the European Union member states. Since 1990, the share of
population under 14 years in total population has been declining. Moreover, there is a
simultaneous increase in the share of the population aged 65 and over.
T OT AL P OP U LAT ION D IS T R IB U T ION
For the first time over s o u rc e : NIS 2 0 0 4 a
the last 40 years, in

2002 the share of 30-39 ye ar s
20-29 ye ar s
elder population (over 15-19 ye ar s
18%
13% 40-49 ye ar s
14%
8%
60 years) reached the 50-59 ye ar s
10%
share of young
5-14 ye ar s
population (0-14 14% 60-69 ye ar s
10%
years), both being 0-4 ye ar s 70- ye ar s

5% 8%
around 18%. The
number of children
under 4 years is
constantly decreasing (aprox. 19%), as well as the number of population in the 15-19
years category (8%). These new trends in the population in Romania are expected to
result in a reduction in the number of pupils and students enrolling in the education
system as well as to the need for more health and Social Services in the future. The
ageing process has negative consequences on the overall economy as well, as the
increase in the number of inactive persons burdens the social insurance system,
bringing about, on the background of the lack of substantial reform, higher tax rates.
By regions, one can notice that lower GDP per capita (the case for South, South-east
and South-west) is correlated with higher share of old population and also of the rural
one.
According to the following graph, one can realize the distribution among the total
population between Rural and Urban Population.
The ageing population at rural areas in Romania will create greater economic disparities
in terms of regional development, as economically active population prefers to migrate
internally at larger urban areas. External non-recorded migration for work of the active
population poses important demo-graphic problems that are not really captured by
studies. Informal data suggest that at least 2 million Romanians work abroad in Spain,
Italy, Greece, Germany, etc. This will effect as well to the need to redefine the
appropriate mix for the social infrastructure in urban/rural areas.

Share of Older Groups and Rural Population
Social Indicators
Social and economic factors also contributed to the deterioration of the health status of
Romania’s population after 1990, whether directly or indirectly, affecting factors that
impact on health. The socioeconomic factors with a particular impact on health are:
poverty and unemployment, the household expenditure pattern, social exclusion.
Poverty rate
The poverty rate in 2002 was put at 27%, with the extreme poverty rate estimated at
some 11%, according to a World Bank Report issued in September 2003. The most
serious situation is in the North-East of the country where the poverty rate exceeds 40%.
The categories worst affected by poverty include children - abandoned, severely
neglected, abused, living in extreme poverty; chronically unemployed households;
households with many children; women victim of domestic violence, human trafficking,
sex exploitation; the population in economically depressed areas, poor Roma population.
Unemployment rate
Unemployment rate in Romania was put at 7% in December 2003. The percentage

included formally registered jobless only. By age, the worst affected was the under-25
age group where the unemployment rate had risen to 18.5% by December 2003.
Changes in income distribution
NIS (2002f) evaluates that the household’s income diminished as a result of employment
reduction, macro-stabilisation policy and inflation. A decisive influence for the drop in
real income had the real wages reduction. Thus, the real average wage index
(1990=100%) has decreased dramatically over the period 1991 to 1993, reaching values
below 60% in 1993, with little variation until 2001. In 2001, the real wage represented
61.5% of 1990 wage earnings, marking a slight improvement from 58.6% in 2000 (see
Table below).
Indices of real salary earnings (1990=1)
Indices Households
Year consumptio
n
1990 100 100 Income and household consumption

1991 81,7 92,3
140
112,4
1992 71,3 95,1
105,3
120
126,3
102,6
126,1
100
123,2
1993 59,4 96,7
96,7
96,4
95,1
119,9
121,2
100 92,3
1994 59,4 96,4
100
1990=100
1995 66,5 102,6 80

81,7
1996 72,7 105,3
72,7
71,3
60
66,5
62,3
1997 56,3 112,4
59,4
59,4
58,6
58,6
58,2
56,3
56
40
1998 58,2 126,3
20 Indices
1999 56 126,1
2000 58,6 119,9 Households consumption

0
2001 58,6 121,2 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
2002 62,3 123,2

Source: The Income and the consumption of the Households, NIS, 2003
Simultaneously the households’ consumption increased significantly, especially after

1995 (102.6%) while in 2002 reached 123.2% increased consumption comparing to the
base year (1990). The increasing gap between income and consumption will have
significant effects on public incomes as well as cost that will produce multiple social
effects due to increased poverty. Some of the foreseen social effects include:
! School dropouts for supplementing the family income,
! Insufficient health insurance schemes
! Increased need for social services and
! Need for welfare allowances to a greater population merger
The household expenditure pattern generally reflects how well the household perfoms.
While monthly food expenditure of Romanian households had dropped in 2003 (35.8%
of total household expenditure) from its 2000 level (38.5%), it was still high enough to
place Romania’s population near the poverty threshold (where food accounts for 40% of

all household expenditure). On average, health expenditure makes up just 3.6% of the
household’s total.
According to World Bank estimates, only between 1989 and 1998 poverty increased 6
times. In 2002, the share of poor was estimated at 29% of the population (World Bank
(2002), National Anti-Poverty Commission, (2002), with 11.8% living in extreme poverty
(National Anti-Poverty Commission (2002)). The level of poverty and the deep urban-
rural gap regarding income are probably the main social problems in Romania, but their
solution resides only in continuing the economic recovery.
1.3.3 Regional Infrastructure – Quality of life
Public Transport and Service Infrastructure
Romania represents a crossing area of international pan-European transport corridors,

which are connecting North and South Europe, the West and the East. The transport
network connects networks of neighboring countries with networks of Europe and Asia
as well.
At the Transport Pan-European Conference Crete, 1994 and at the Helsinki Conference
from 1998, the Pan-European transport corridors were reconfirmed, the Romanian
territory being crossed by three of the corridors:
- CORRIDOR IV: Berlin – Nürnberg – Prague – Budapest – Bucharest –Constanţa

– Salonic - Istanbul.
- CORRIDOR IX: Helsinki - St.Petersburg – Moscow – Pskov – Kiev –

Liubashevska – Chişinau – Bucharest – Dimitrovgrad - Alexandroupolis.
- CORRIDOR VII: Danube River, inclusively connection on Danube Channel –

Black Sea.
- Corridors IV and IX are multimode, included junctions and centers of collection

and distribution among transport modes: road, railway, fluvial and maritime.
The route of Corridors IV and IX within Romania are:
- Corridor IV Nadlac – Bucharest – Constanta and south branch Lugoj – Calafat
- Corridor IX Albita – Focsani – Ploiesti – Bucharest – Giurgiu

Pan – European Corridors
Source: Ministry of Transports, Constructions, and Tourism
Source: Ministry of Transports, Constructions and Tourism
Although it is advantaged by geographical position, Romania has a poorly developed

infrastructure, while lacking of investments in this domain is more and more perceived as
a barrier for the economy development. So, lack of satisfactory progress in
modernization of principal transport corridors brings the danger of losing benefits from
Romania’s geographical position, on transit routes West – East and North – South.
Compared to the Member States of the EU and to some of the East-European States,
the Romanian transport system is insufficiently developed and of poor quality.
There is an important need to develop the transportation system in Romania in order

also to support the increase on demand21 and to accelerate the progress of its economy
while joining the European Union.
The total length of public road network in Romania, at the end of 2002, was of 78,896
km (of which 25.3% are modernized public roads).
Although during the period 1995-2002, the public roads modernized network from
Romania roused, the density of public roads (33.1 km/100 sq.km) continues to be very
low in comparison to average of UE countries (116 km/sq.km).
21
Imports rose from 11.5 million tons in 2000 to 20.8 million tons in 2004 and exports increased from 10.5
million tons in 2000 to 15.6 million tons in 2004, in Constanta, the most important port in Romania.

Romania’s public road network, in the period 1995-2002
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

Length of the public road network
72,859 73,160 73,161 73,260 73,435 78,479 78,492 78,896
(km)
Length of modernized public road
17,608 17,716 17,813 18,031 18,084 19,418 19,868 19,958
network (km)
Density of public roads (km/100
30.6 30.7 30.7 30.7 30.8 32.9 32.9 33.1
sq.km)
Roads network is poorly developed and has low quality in comparison to UE countries.
Romania’s public road network, by regions, in the period 1995-2002

Region Public National roads County and Density of public
roads-total (km) communal roads roads (per
(km) (km) 100kmp of
territory)
North-East Region 13,388 2,606 10,782 36.3
South-East Region 10,565 1,718 8,847 29.5
South-Muntenia Region 11,838 2,517 9,321 34.4
South-West Oltenia
10,375 1,944 8,431 35.5
Region
West Romania Region 10,192 1,881 8,311 31.8
North-West Region 11,583 1,942 9,641 33.9
Center Region 10,105 2,027 8,078 29.6
Bucharest-Ilfov Region 850 197 653 46.7
Public road network is distributed uniformly, by regions, if Bucharest-Ilfov Region isn’t

taken into consideration, where, due to the capital, density of public roads is much
bigger (46.7/100 sq.km).
The rehabilitation and development of public roads network has been and is a priority of
Romania’s economic policy.
The road traffic within the country is not uniform, on some routes it has high values
(16,000 vehicle/day on routes Bucharest – Ploiesti – Sinaia, Constanta – Eforie), and on
other routes it has very low values (750 – 3,500 vehicles/day on majority roads from
North – West and North – East Regions, Dobrogea and Danube riverain roads; below
750 vehicles/day on isolated sectors of roads), these values being registered in 2000. In
the same year, on the whole national road network the average value of annual daily
traffic was of 3,455 vehicles.
Provided that roads are the straightforward mode of transport to achieve accessibility for
people and cargo, decisions were taken to allocate large financial resources for the
improvement and enlargement of the national road network.

Rail has maintained relatively high market shares: 40 percent for freight and 54-55
percent for passenger transport measured as share of ton-km and passenger-km but
there is a need both to achieve better maintenance of the tracks and to become more
competitive and costumer oriented. In 2001 railway transport of passengers represented
54.6% of total amount of passengers – km, who were totally transported in Romania,
and transport of freight represented 41.4% of total amount t-km totally transported,
situation that shows a high weight of this mode of transport in comparison to Member
States, where railway transport of passengers represented 6% from the amount of
passengers – km, and railway transport of freight represented 14% from the amount of
tons – km.
In 2002 the Romanian railway network was of 11,005 km, of which 3,950 km (35.97%)
are electrified and 2,965 km (26.9%) are dual tracked. The unfolded railway network has
a total length of 22,298 km, Romania ranking 7th place in Europe in that respect, after
Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Poland and Ukraine. The density of the railway lines in
use is of approximately 46.2 km per 1000 sq.km and being below average of EU
countries (65 km/1000 sq.km).
The lack of financial resources led to drastic reductions in expenditures for the
maintenance of infrastructure and the replacement of rolling stock (outdated and
insufficient in both quantitative and qualitative terms), thus significantly damaging the
railway transport both from quality and safety point of view. The Romanian railway
infrastructure is consequently below EU standards.
Romanian railway network, in the period 1995-2002

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Length of railway network
11,376 11,385 11,380 11,010 10,981 11,015 11,015 11,002
(km)
Length of electrified railway
3,866 3,960 3,943 3,929 3,942 3,950 3,950 3,950
network (km)
METROREX SA Bucharest, legally assimilated to rail transport as a company for

passengers transport, uses an underground railway network, dual tracked, with a length
of 62.2 km. The network operated by the company has 45 stations, structured on 4
trunks and takes over 25% of population that is transported in Bucharest.
Airports and ports are being reorganized to become more independent and self-
governing public bodies to better run their infrastructures and handle the traffic
forecast22.
22
At the Port of Constanza, the container traffic in 2005 is forecast at 600.000 TEU, six times the container
traffic in 2000. The total traffic handled accounts for 50,4 millions of tons in 2004, 17 % increase over 2003.

In Romania there are 17 airports and the most important airports are Bucharest Otopeni
(81.4% of total traffic carried on 2002), Timisoara (6.7%), Constanta (2.1%), and
Bucharest Baneasa (1.2%).
These 4 airports are under the authority of the Ministry of Transports, Constructions and
Tourism, while the other 13 are under authority of County Councils. All 17 airports are
opened for international traffic. Now, 9 airports are usually used for international traffic.
The Danube River, which crosses the country along 1,075 km and the navigable
channels, as well as 193.5 km representing the Black Sea coastline, offers to Romania
an important potential to develop its waterway transport sector.
Maritime transport totals three sea harbors (Constanta, Midia and Mangalia), which are
under the administration of the "Maritime Ports Administration" National Company and
four fluvial - maritime harbors (Sulina, Tulcea, Galati, Braila). Over 50% of harbors
infrastructures need reconstruction and modernization works.
The largest harbor in Romania and one of the largest in Europe, Constanta, could play a
major role in international trade, but requires modernization works in order to maximize
its capacity and to improve the quality of the services provided.
Romanian sector of the Danube includes Maritime Danube and Fluvial Danube with 30
harbors, of which 4 are fluvial – maritime harbors and 26 are fluvial harbors.
The Romanian harbors totalized 40,000 km embankments, of which 18.1% were

constructed 60 years ago and need urgently reconstruction works. In these ports is
carried out a smaller activity, in comparison with the activity carried out in Member
States harbors.
***
Development of transport infrastructure has major implications in the economic

development of the country, stimulating undeveloped regions and increasing their
economic results. Foreign investments attraction, development of industrial parks and
tourism stimulating are only some sectors influenced directly by transport infrastructure
development. Industry of construction materials and new jobs creation are strong
influenced by transport infrastructure development. Also, transport infrastructure at
European standards, connected adequately to TEN-T, and involves an important
increase of internal and external trade.
A main factor in the disparities among and within regions is the difference in accessibility
of regions to county, national, and international transport network and its inadequate
quality.

Some of regions, which benefit from a good access to transport infrastructure, are:
Bucharest – Ilfov, Center, and South - Muntenia. Bucharest – Ilfov Region concentrates
the airports with the most intense international and national traffic. Center Region has
some important railway junctions through which it is realized the connection between
Romania and Western and Central Europe. South - Muntenia Region has the most part
of the national roads network modernized, being crossed by four international roads, and
having a good access to national and international roads network.
Among regions with limited access to transport infrastructure is North – East Region.
Within this region, Botosani County has 18.7% unpaved roads, impassable. Region’s
railway network is under the national average from the point of view of sections length
and technical endowment.
The transport infrastructure has been identified as an important sub-priority within the
Regional Operational Programme (ROP). Nevertheless, as ensuring accessibility of
people and goods is the main goal attributed to the SOP, it is not the mission of this
ROP sub-priority at all. Even more, it is assumed that accessibility does not only mean
the building up of national transport networks but to really provide access of all the
territory to those networks. As a consequence of that there wouldn’t be local (judetean or
communal) roads in the ROP but as an exception or as a complementary or subsidiary
bases. Those circumstances or conditions to be met to become eligible are specified in
the area of intervention.
Environment
The ROP priorities and operations are also developed in respect to the need for the
integration of environmental protection policies of the Community, including preventive
actions, and actions aiming to combat environmental damage. In addition, Romania is
currently undertaking actions in enhancing its administrative capacity in this area. In
2004, progress has been registered in the field of horizontal legislation regarding
environmental issues. Legislation was adopted on procedures relating to environmental
impact assessment and strategic environmental impact assessment.
As regards air quality, Romania has adopted legislation on sulphur content of liquid
fuels, designation of inspection bodies, volatile organic compound emissions, and
conditions for placing gasoline and diesel fuels on the market. Zones for air quality
assessment and management have also been defined. A preliminary assessment of air
has been carried out and an air quality-monitoring network for agglomerations designed.
Procedures for drawing up and implementing air quality management plans and

programmes were published and a national strategy and action plan for atmosphere
protection approved.
In the first half of the decade, some improvement of the air quality has been observed,
due to the reduction of the economic activity and to the modernization and technology
application programmes undertaken by a number of industrial units, as well as to the
activity of the Inspectorates for Environment Protection (increased number of inspections
at the economic agents whose activity has an impact on the air quality).
In the Romanian regions, the main industrial polluters of the atmosphere are enterprises
from the fields of metallurgy, the production, transport and distribution of electrical and
thermal energy, natural gas and warm water (especially thermal power plants) and the
cement industry.
Gas emissions with acidifying effect23

SO2 annual emissions NOx annual emissions NH3 annual emissions
Source Combustions in power and Combustions in power Dejections from cattle
transformation industries industry and transformation breeding
industries
1995 –2000 1,085 thousand tons (1995) 407 thousand tons (1995) 249 thousand tons (1995)
variation 774 thousand tons (2000) 332 thousand tons (2000) 233 thousand tons (2000)
In 2001, a significant increase in SO2 şi NOx emissions was registered. The increase in
SO2 emissions was due mainly to the increase in industrial production and to the fact
that new data on fuels, previously unavailable, were taken into account.
Exceeds of maximum admissible concentration24 (MAC)
Localities where average

Localities where average daily concentrations
Pollutant annual concentrations
exceeded MAC
exceeded MAC
SO2 Zlatna, Baia Mare, Copsa Mica, Medias Zlatna
NO2 Carei, Medias, Bucuresti, Barlad, Satu Mare, Bistrita Carei
NH3 Hunedoara, Iasi, Suceava, Zalau, Alba Iulia, Bistrita, Hunedoara
Satu Mare, Slobozia, Tg. Mures, Vaslui
Note: The high values registered in Bucharest for NO2 concentration are due to increased road traffic
Another area of concern is the emissions of heavy metals (mercury, cadmium, lead),
which are produced by industrial processes.
Exceeds of maximum admissible concentration (MAC)8

Polutant Localities where average daily concentrations exceeded MAC
Pb Baia Mare, Copşa Mică, Mediaş, Giurgiu
23
Source: Report on the State of the Environment in Romania for 2002
24

Cd Copşa Mică, Baia Mare, Mediaş
Persistent organic pollutants emissions (POP) are observed in agriculture sector, with
emissions of toxic substances, mainly through the existing deposits with unidentified
forbidden substances and/or expired ones. Currently in agriculture the use of forbidden
toxic substance is very limited due to the poorness of the new agricultural landowners.
Another source is the pesticide productive industry.
Romania has proceeded with the development of an inventory of the potentially toxic
and dangerous substances, according to a procedure harmonised to the international
practice. Out of these, production and use of Aldrin, Chlordane, DDT, Dieldrin, Endrin,
Heptachlor and HCB is forbidden on Romania’s territory.
The non-ferrous metallurgy, thermal power stations, cement plants and road transport
represent the main atmospheric pollution sources.
Exceeds of maximum admissible concentration (MAC)25

Suspension powder Sediment powder
Exceeds of - Average daily concentrations exceeded Exceedance of monthly MAC in most
MAC MAC in 21 localities, especially: Romanian regions, especially in the
Zlăşti- Hunedoara (de 10 ori CMA), Zalău following areas:
(de 5,11 ori CMA), Suceava, Copşa Mică, Constanţa, Hămeiuş-Bacău, Taşca-Neamţ,
Timişoara, Reşiţa, Rm.Vâlcea, Arad, Roman, Şelari-Argeş, Nicolae Bălcescu-
Hunedoara, Mediaş, Govora, Piatra Neamţ Bacău.
- Average annual concentrations exceeded
MAC in 8 localities, with the highest
values in Arad and Reşiţa
The greenhouse gases emissions decreased by approx. 63%, in the period 1989-2002
and methane emissions decreased by 48.4%, while N2O emissions decreased by 77%
due to a reduction in use of chemical fertilizers in agriculture. Out of the gross total
greenhouse gas emission, the emission in the energy sector is 64.8%. Compared to
1989, a significant reduction of greenhouse effect gas emission in the energy sector was
registered, due mainly to the reduced industrial production.
One of the most serious environmental protection problems in Romania is waste

management. Romanian data regarding waste management distinguish between two
important categories of waste, namely:
! municipal waste and waste similar to it
! production waste, including mining sterile and waste resulted from the energy
production.
25

Throughout the period 1998 – 2002, the ratio between the two categories has varied
from one year to another, having an average of approximately 6% municipal waste and
94% production waste. In total production, the mining sterile has a share of over 90%.
The upward trend in waste generation is due to the rise in consumption during the past
10 years, but also to the still obsolete industrial plants and technologies in Romanian
industry.
During 2002, over 380 million tons of waste were generated in Romania, of which
approx. 2% was waste collected by municipalities and 98% was waste generated by
mining, industry, agriculture, constructions etc.
Municipal waste designates the total amount of waste generated in both urban and rural
areas by households, institutions and economic agents, as well as street waste and
sludge resulted from urban wastewater treatment plants. The current practices of
municipal waste collection/transport/storage are inadequate, generating a negative
impact upon the environmental factors and facilitating pathogen agents.
In 2002, the municipalities collected 7.9 million tons of municipal waste, of which 72%
was household waste, 18% waste from municipal services, 8% waste from
constructions/demolitions and 2% other. This does not represent, however, the total
quantity of municipal waste generated, because only 88% of the household waste
generated in Romania was collected. The rest was illegally stored in places that are not
intended for such purposes. 90% of the urban population benefits from household waste
collection services, but in rural areas (47.3% of Romania’s population, according to 2002
census) there are no specialized services for household waste collection and
transportation.
The average indicator regarding household waste generation in Romania is 1.04

kg/inhabitant/day in urban areas, and 0.15 kg/inhabitant/day in rural areas. Based on
this, it can be estimated that in 2002, a total of 6.535 million tons of household waste
was generated.
The composition of household waste for the year 2002 is assessed as follows: paper
and cardboard (11%), glass (5%), metals (4.5%), plastic materials (10%), textiles (5%),
organic waste (51%), other (13.5%). The selective collection of household waste, which
represents the largest part of municipal waste, is carried out only in a few towns, in an
experimental phase. Consequently, approximately 18% of municipal waste, represented
by non-contaminated recyclable materials (paper, cardboard, glass, plastic materials,
metals) is not recovered. It is estimated that only ~2% of municipal waste recycled.

In Romania almost the entire volume of municipal waste collected is eliminated by
storage on the disposal sites. Except for compression, carried out in modern transport
vehicles, there is no other previous treatment applied to municipal waste before
disposal.
Over 95% of municipal waste is stored, each locality having at least one landfill for
municipal waste. In 2002, 252 municipal waste landfills belonging to the towns and cities
were registered, representing 27% of the total landfills in the country. Municipal landfills
occupy approximately 840 ha, that is approximately 6.7% of the total areas affected by
waste storage.
Most municipal landfills are mixed (60%), accepting for storage both urban and industrial
waste, usually non-dangerous. Sometimes, however, dangerous industrial waste is also
illegally accepted. The mix of these types of waste generates a levigate (levigate – any
liquid that percolated the land filled waste and is eliminated or retained in the landfill
depozit) loaded with harmful substances that pollutes surface and ground waters or the
soil and implicitly affect the state of population health in the area.
An additional negative aspect is the fact that many useful and recyclable materials (36%
of municipal waste collected) are stored together with non-recyclable ones and is
chemically and biologically contaminated, which makes their recovery difficult.
As regards facilities of the municipal landfills, over 40% of them have no facilities for
environmental protection (waterproofing, drains, monitoring drill etc.).
A number of 11 ecological household waste landfills are currently operational

(Constanţa, Brăila, Piatra Neamţ, Sighişoara, Boldeşti Scăieni, Sibiu, Vidra, Giulesti-
Sârbi, Glina, Băicoi, Băneşti) and 4 new landfills are under construction (Braşov, Buzău,
Slatina, Arad).
The following indicator presents the share of municipal waste collected by or on behalf of
municipal authorities and disposed of through landfill. The bulk of this waste stream is
from households, though, "similar" wastes from sources such as commerce, offices and
public institutions are included. Landfill is defined as deposit of waste into or onto land,
including specially engineered landfill, and temporary storage of over one year on
permanent sites. The definition covers both landfill in internal sites (i.e. where a
generator of waste is carrying out its own waste disposal at the place of generation) and
in external sites. The quantity land filled is expressed in kg per capita per year.
Municipal waste collected by or on behalf of municipal authorities and disposed of

through landfill
2001 2002 2003

Romania 266 307 288
EU (25 countries) 276 267 261
EU (15 countries) 275 264 259
The share of municipal waste collected by or on behalf of municipal authorities and

disposed of through incineration is shown in the following table. The bulk of this waste
stream is from households, though "similar" wastes from sources such as commerce,
offices and public institutions are included. Incineration means thermal treatment of
waste in an incineration plant as defined in Article 3(4) or a co-incineration plant as
defined in Article 3(5) of the Directive on the incineration of waste. (Directive 2000/76/EC
of 4 December 2000). The quantity incinerated is expressed in kg per capita per year.
Municipal waste collected by or on behalf of municipal authorities and disposed of

through incineration
2001 2002 2003
EU (15 countries) 102 106 108
EU (25 countries) 87 91 92
Romania 0 0 0
As regards the amount of waste collected by or on behalf of municipal authorities and

disposed of through the waste management system, the bulk of this waste stream is
from households, though "similar" wastes from sources such as commerce, offices and
public institutions are included. The quantity collected is expressed in kg per capita per
year.
Municipal authorities and disposed of through the waste management system
2001 2002 2003
EU (15 countries) 558 574 577
EU (25 countries) 520 531 534

Romania 336 383 364
In the area of waste management, Romania has adopted in 2004 legal acts on
shipments of waste and technical norms on the use of sewage sludge in agriculture.
Revisions of the national waste management strategy and the national waste
management plan are underway. The inventory of non-hazardous landfills for municipal
waste was also updated.
The Ministry of Environment and Water Management was designated as the competent
authority for shipments of waste. Closing and reconstruction of existing landfills and the
establishment of new ones is ongoing.
In the field of water quality, the water law was amended in 2004, in order to align with
the water framework Directive and legislation regarding drinking water was amended.

Legislation was adopted on an integrated monitoring system for nitrate pollution and on
the approval of programmes for monitoring pollutants from agricultural sources.
Regulations were also adopted on the monitoring of water quality with regard to certain
dangerous substances, and on the hygiene norms of bottled water.
Romania’s water resources are made of the surface waters – rivers, lakes, Danube
River – and, to a smaller degree, approximately 10%, underground waters.
The specific water resource usable in natural regime is of approximately 2,680

m3/inhabitant and year, compared to the European average of 4000 m3/inhabitant and
year. The theoretic specific resource of approximately 1,760 m3/inhabitant and year,
taking into consideration only the contribution of inland rivers, ranking Romania from this
point of view in the category of the countries with relatively short water resources against
resources of other countries.
During 2002, the global quality of the surface running water, assessed according to the
situation from the 311 surveillance sections of 1st class, had the following distribution:
category I 26(56.9 %); category II27 (27.7 %); category III28 (7.7 %); category D29 (7.7
%).
Taking as criterion the weighting of “degraded water” sections (D), the most
unfavourable conditions were recorded in the following basins: Prut (approximately 18.0
%) and Ialomiţa (17.5 %).
Due to the poor water quality, adductions that parallel the rivers are necessary in certain
areas (Brădişor – Rm. Vâlcea, Zetea – Cristuru Secuiesc, Odorheiu Secuiesc, Copşa
Mică, Dumbrăveni, Mediaş, Ploieşti, Bacău etc.)
As of 1989, a significant improvement of waters quality can be noticed, revealed by the

increase in weight of sections with waters of the 1st category, respectively by the
decrease in weight of sections with degraded waters and of the IInd and IIIrd category.
This improvement in river water quality is due mainly to investments made by industrial
agents, the firm application of the legal provisions in force regarding water protection,
but also to the reduction or cessation of activity of certain large polluters.
26 Category I can be transformed into drinking waters to supply populated centres, or can be used to supply livestock farms and trout
farms
27 Category II are surface waters that can be used in fish culture (except for salmon farms), as water supply for technological
requirements of industries and for leisure

28 Category III waters can be used to irrigate agricultural crops, to produce electrical power in hydroelectric power plants, in industrial
cooling installations, in washing devices

29 Category D are degraded waters where fish fauna cannot develop

Generally, the most important threat in terms of on-the-spot pollution comes from public
utilities units, chemical industry and the animal breeding sector, followed by enterprises
in the extraction and metallurgic industries.
The diffuse pollution is due to pollutants in the aquatic environment whose origin is
difficult to identify and control. This includes primarily agricultural pollution, solid and
liquid deposits from the atmosphere, but also pollution resulting from the consumption of
products/raw materials in the extraction industry and from population consumption.
The drinking water supply network has expanded continuously, especially in the rural
areas, and in 2002 it was 20.1% longer than in 1995. There was an increase in the
number of localities with drinking water supply equipment, from 2,653 in 1995 to 3,236 in
2001.
Evolution of drinking water supply network, in the period 1995-200230

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Network length (km) 33520 34497 35287 36608 37417 38238 39104 40269
Volume of drinking
2029 2085 2026 2000 1849 1700 1530 1349
water supplied (mil.cm)
Number of localities 2653 2740 2803 2911 2997 3029 3092 3236
In 2002, the volume of drinking water supplied was 1,349 million m3, 33.6% lower than in
1995. Although the plain length of the supply network has grown and the number of
localities provided with drinking water has increased, the volume of drinking water
supplied has continuously dropped. The average drinking water consumption is below
necessities and far below international standards.
Romania has also taken steps to declare the entire territory as a sensitive area for the
purposes of urban wastewater treatment. Action plans for agglomerations have been
prepared, together with an assessment of the current wastewater infrastructure. A
methodology was developed for the designation of vulnerable zones that drain into
waters affected by nitrate pollution.
The statistic analysis of the situation of the main used water sources, according to the
results of the surveillance carried out in 2002 revealed the fact that the total used water
volume discharged is approx. 4840.9 million m3, of which 60 % need treatment. In 2002,
approximately 75% of the used waters coming from the main pollution sources reached
the natural receivers, mainly rivers, untreated or insufficiently treated.
30
Source: National Statistics Institute

The highest share of the polluting potential belongs to companies in the field of
communal management and chemical processing, followed by economic agents in the
filed of mining industry, metallurgy and animal breeding.
Compared to the total number of 1,453 treatment plants investigated in 2002, 647 plants
(i.e. approximately 44.5%) functioned properly, while the rest, 806 stations (i.e. 55.5%)
functioned improperly. So it results that, as regards functioning of treatment plants, the
situation is still critical in 2002, the ratio between the proper situations and the improper
ones being unfavorable for the first category.
As regards nature protection, activities relating to preparation of the Natura 2000

network have been implemented in the past years, and in the transposition of legal acts
in this field.
Romania is a country having a high biological diversity, both in terms of ecosystems and
in terms of species. Except for the large agricultural areas and some terrestrial and
aquatic ecosystems that are under the negative impact of certain pollution sources,
where modifications of the biological diversity structure and dynamics are found, the rest
of the natural environment remains within the natural quality parameters, providing the
necessary conditions for the preservation of the specific biological diversity.
Romanian natural and seminatural ecosystems represent approximately 47% of the

country’s area. Following the studies undertaken within CORINE Biotops Programme
783 types of habitats were identified and characterised (13 coast habitats, 89 wet areas,
196 lawns, 206 forest-type, 54 swamp-type, 90 rock/sands and 135 agricultural) in the
261 areas analysed across the Romanian territory.
A number of 44 areas of avifauna importance were identified, covering a total area of

6,557 km2, representing 3% of the country’s area. The activities undertaken at national
level are aimed at implementing the objectives of the Strategy and National Action Plan
regarding Biodiversity.
The total surface of protected natural areas, covered by Law 5/2000 regarding the
endowment of the national territory, IIIrd section, protected areas, is 1,234,710 ha, i.e.
5.18% of the total country’s surface.
The following categories of protected natural areas are accepted in Romania, defined
according to the related management objectives: scientific reserve, natural reserve,
national park, Natural Park, nature’s monument, biosphere reserve, internationally
important wet area (Ramsar site), site of the natural world patrimony.

Romania’s Biosphere Reserves, National and Natural Parks31
Biosphere reserves, natural parks and national parks amount to 1,132,176 ha (including
134 scientific reserves, natural reserves and nature’s monuments of 129,643 ha total
area), plus other 693 scientific reserves, natural reserves and nature’s monuments of
102,434 ha.
The area of the national forestry fund is 6,388 thousand ha, representing 26.8% of
Romania’s territory. In addition to this, the forest vegetation located outside the forest
stock (afforested pastures, leading line of trees along roads and railways, vegetation
corridors near waters, etc.) covering about 320,000 ha.
Romania has a standing wood volume of over 1350 millions m3, in the structure of which
there is a preponderance of valuable economic essences (39% resinous, 37% beech,
13% oak species). Out of the entire annual forest production, the percentage of wood
products is 70-75%, the difference being represented by the provided turning to good
account non-wood forest products: medical, alimentary plants, tanning materials,
dyestuff and ornamentals of the wild flora. Romanian woods also have an important
tourism and hunting potential. In Romania there are still 400 thousand hectares of virgin
woods, with a great resource value from a natural biodiversity point of view.
31
Source: Ministry of Agriculture, Forests, Waters and Environment

In 2002, a number of important measures were taken in the field of ecological
reconstruction works through forest plantations, afforestation, natural regeneration in the
forest stock, as well as raising the public awareness.
The Black Sea has a 413,490 km2 area, a maximum depth of 2,245 m, a 529,955 km2
water volume and a total seashore length of 4,020 km. It has a low level of salinity (20-
22%). Of the river contribution, estimated at 346 km2, 78% comes from rivers situated in
the north-west of the basin and, out of these, obviously to the Danube.
In the past 10 years a slight improvement of the sea waters quality has been noticed due
to the reduction in the activities across the basin. But, as a result of alluvia deficit, as well
as of the reduction of the contribution of the Danube, beaches suffer from rapid erosion.
The polluting sources of the Black Sea Romanian waters are the following: Năvodari
Industrial Platform insufficiently treated industrial and household used waters resulted
from the treatment plants of Constanţa and Mangalia.
To date in the Black Sea approximately 1,500 species of vertebrates and non-
vertebrates were inventoried. As a result of the strong industrial and town pollution over
the past two decades the reduction of several predatory fishes species was found, as
well as of certain fish species of economic importance: mackerel, plaice, anchovy, scad,
sturgeon.
As regards industrial pollution control and risk management, relevant legislation were
adopted in 2004, including on issuing integrated permits. The inventory of installations
falling under integrated pollution prevention and control has been revised and an
assessment of these installations has been performed. A first exercise to compile a
pollutant emissions register was completed.
Romania’s natural resources of non-regenerating raw materials have been and still are
exploited and processed using technologies that have led to the intense pollution of
some areas in the country. Extraction and use of fossil fuels (coal, crude oil), mines, as
well as iron and steel industry, power industry, chemical and oil industry, paper and pulp
industry, building materials industry, etc., significantly contribute to the pollution of
environment factors by means of common pollutants (sulphur dioxide, carbon dioxide,
nitrogen dioxide, ammonium), heavy metals, sediment powders and suspension
powders and other specific pollutants such as formaldehyde, sulphuric hydrogen, carbon
sulphide, chlorine, chlorides etc.
Efficient and ecological preservation and use of energetic resources are of major
importance. The pollution from energy activity, upstream and downstream from the place
where energy is produced, is responsible for the pollutants existence in proportion of

more than 50% of methane and carbon monoxide emission, 97% of SO2 emission, 88%
of NOx emission, 99% CO2 emission.
Non-ferrous metallurgy has also major effects on environment factors, as it is shown in

situation of air and soil quality in Copşa Mică, Zlatna and Baia Mare, which are critical
areas or “hot areas” regarding pollution, characterised by systematic exceedance of
maximum admissible concentrations of heavy metals, SO2 and sediment powders and
by soil loading with heavy metals.
Road traffic affects the environment through NOx emission. The pressures of auto traffic
increased in 2002 compared to 2001, as a result of a rise in the number of vehicles and
of traffic intensification. The quantity of pollutants emitted into atmosphere has
increased, pollutants resulted from fuel burning and from particles involved in traffic.
Road traffic is a source of phonic pollution, fact demonstrated by measurements of noise
level through which was observed an exceeding of admissible values.
Orientation toward more sustainable transport ways requires more efficient transport
means from the point of view of energy consumption and less detrimental to the
environment and pubic health. Although it has a strong impact on noise level, the railway
transport is an ecological transport way and one of the most efficient measures in view
of decreasing the pollution, having positive results both on short term and on medium
term.
Agricultural surface increased in 2001 by 63,611 ha (0.43%), compared to 1996. In the

period 1996-2000 the organic fertilised land area decreased from 7.09% of arable area
to 6.8% of arable area. The diminishing dynamic of fertilization shows that there is
currently no “pressure” on the soil from this point of view. In comparison with the EU
member states, Romania is far from the situation of being “saturated” with phytosanitary
products. In Romania the consumption per ha arable land, vineyards and orchards
during the last 12 years was between 2.11 and 0.89 kg a.s/ ha.
Tourism can bring important damages to natural eco-systems. During summer time, the
population in certain Romanian counties doubles, tourism having a considerable
pressure on environment as the household waste water quantity doubles, road traffic
doubles and implicitly the auto emissions and noise level. The main stress factors
concerning the practice of recreation tourism are determined by the pollution resulted
from transport and waste management.
In the last years, agro-tourism developed in Romania, as a form of eco-tourism. The

latter combines obtaining economic profit with nature conservation and local
communities’ development in areas where it is practiced. As Romania has relatively wide

areas barely affected by human activities, there is strong potential for eco-tourism to
develop even more in the future get bigger amplitude in the future.
In the field of chemicals and genetically modified organisms, Romania has recently
adopted legislation on ozone-depleting substances and on approving the updated
national programme for their phasing out.
An assessment of environmental noise was performed in 2004 and relevant urban

agglomerations, highways, railways and airports were identified.
As regards nuclear safety and radiation protection, Romania has published in 2004 new
norms on safety and radiation protection. An inventory relating to the practices involving
the risk of ionising radiation was drawn up. A database on licence applications and
licences issued for shipments of radioactive materials was set up. Three applications for
shipments were registered, for which licences were also issued in 2004.
Education
Short Enrolment rates
Romania’s child population is decreasing sharply. In 1980, there were 7,349,000

children between the ages of 0-17; in 1997, there were 5,553,000. The trend is even
more clear from the number of children in the 0-4 age group: 1,998,000 in 1980,
compared with 1,191,000 in 1997.
According to the table below there is a significant fall to pupils’ enrolment during the
period of 1990-2003 to the level of 11,5%, from 5,066,031in 1990 to 4,496,786 in 2003.
General enrolment rates have dropped at all levels, except Post high school and Tertiary
education.

Pupils enrolment in the period 1990-2003
Pupils enrolement rates for the period 1990-2003

in %
250,00
209,27
200,00
Pre-school
Compulsory
150,00
Secondary General
111,65
Secondary VET
100,00 Post-high school
Tertiary
50,00
0,00
-11,24 1
-19,48 -25,64 -26,14
-50,00
Schools by type and population in 2003

School Type No of schools No of Students No of Teachers Pupil: Teacher
ratio (P:TR)
ALL TYPES 23679 4496786 286670 15,7
Pre-school 9547 629703 34307 18,4
Compulsory 12456 2198312 154197 14,3
Secondary General 1388 740404 60988 12,1
Secondary VET 85 270215 6063 44,6
Post-high school 78 61855 1496 41,3
Tertiary 125 596297 29619 20,1
Source: National Institute of Statistics, Yearbook 2003
The educational infrastructure
According to the NIS in 2003 there were more 23.679 educational institutions of all levels
with 4.496.786 students enrolled.
At the pre-school educational level, according to table 2 and Graph 2, there are about
9.547 kindergartens for almost 629.703 enrolled children. However, there is an
accounted decline in enrollment of students at almost 16,3% with a simultaneous
decreasing of schools at almost 23% in the period of 1990-2003. The first impression is
that in 2003 pupils are gathered in schools in greater numbers than in 1990, estimated to
66 pupils per school comparing to 59-60 in 1990. That might have some negative effects
in the educational process.

Rates of Student by School in the period 1990-2003 Lower level of Education
Students/ Schools
Pre-School, Prim ary and Secondary Education
250,00
No of Students by School (aver.)
200,00
150,00
100,00
50,00
0,00
1
93
94
95
3
99
99
99
99
99
99
00
00
00
00
19
19
19
/1
/1
/1
/1
/1
/1
/2
/2
/2
/2
2/
3/
4/
90
91
95
96
97
98
99
00
01
02
99
99
99
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
Pre-school education Prim ary and secondary education
At Primary and Secondary education this is not the case however, due to the combined
significant decline of enrolement of students in the years 2000-2002 by a rate of 19,5%
and a simultaneous decreasing of available schools to the rate of 7,8% from 1990 to
2003.
At the higher level of education including High schools and Vocational Training the
situation presents different and ambiguous trends. High Schools present a balanced rate
of students by institution through out the period on question with a small declining rate
the last three years. The actual decreasing of Students through the period 1990-2003
(25%) is followed by a significant increase of buildings to 15% since 1990 (from 1198 to
1388 high schools). Today there is an average of 533 students per school, a rate that is
very close to the international standards for the educational process.
Therefore the demand for school places is less, even on purely demographic grounds for
the primary, secondary and High school level.
On the contrary, it seems that there is greater demand driven problem in the availability
of suitable school places for Vocational and Apprenticeship education where there is a
decline of available schools at the level of 87% through-out the period 1990-2003 (from
707 schools to 87 in 2003). The situation is almost the same in the Post high school
educations where there is a decline in absolute school numbers and a simultaneous
significant increase of student enrollment (up to 111% since 1990).

Rates of Student by School in the period 1990-2003 - higher level of Education
Students/ School
High School, Vocational, Post High
3500
No of Students by school (aver)
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
97
1
93
94
95
3
99
99
99
99
99
00
00
00
00
19
19
19
19
/1
/1
/1
/1
/1
/2
/2
/2
/2
/
2/
3/
4/
90
91
95
96
98
99
97
00
01
02
99
99
99
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
High school education Vocational and apprenticeship education
Post high school and foremen education
Dropout rates
About 17% of the cohort entering grade 1 drop out before the end of grade 8 (analysis of
figures 1988/89 through 1995/96); that is, 83% of the original cohort graduate from grade
8.To this drop-out figure, add 2-3% for children who never entered school at all (many of
them Roma) This last percentage includes mortality, as well (i.e. children who did not
reach school age).
No reliable data were available about reasons for dropping out of basic compulsory
schooling, but anecdotal evidence is that drop-out is higher in rural areas where family
income depends more on subsistence agriculture on family plots than on modern-sector
paid employment where qualifications matter. Roma children also rarely reach upper
secondary school.
Tertiary education
At the Tertiary educational Level the situation seems to be more or less stable due to
simultaneous increase of infrastructure and enrolment of students.

Tertiary Education Students/ institutions rates
T e rtia ry e d u ca tio n
60 00
50 00
40 00
30 00
20 00
10 00
0
19 90 /19 91 9 92 /1 9 93 99 4 /1 99 5 1 9 96 /1 99 7 19 98 /19 99 20 00 /20 01 2 00 2/2 00 3
As regards the number of tertiary education graduates per education discipline, the
current distribution in Romania (2003) is of an average of 22% graduates in technical
disciplines, 25% in economics and 33% in humanities:
Number of graduates from tertiary education by group and discipline
A rts
H u m a n itie s
2 0 0 3 /2 0 0 3
L a w 2 0 0 1 /2 0 0 2
2 0 0 0 /2 0 0 1
E c o n o m ic s 1 9 9 9 /2 0 0 0
1 9 9 8 /1 9 9 9
M e d i c a l a n d fa r m a c e u t i c a l
T e c h n ic a l
0 % 1 0 % 2 0 % 3 0 % 4 0 % 5 0 % 6 0 %
Finaly, the graph herewith,shows

additionally, the distribution of the number of
employees per level of education (2004):
1.3.4 Tourism
At present the contribution of the Romanian tourism to the national economy is still
insignificant compared to other competitive countries’ achievements, including Central
and Eastern European countries. The tourist sector has a direct contribution to the GDP

of 2.6%, an insignificant value if considering the weights of the other countries (Hungary
10%, Poland 13.1%)32.
Approximately 42.7% of Romania’s tourism accommodation capacity is provided by the

Black Sea resorts, 16.3% in Bucharest and county capitals (exclusively Tulcea), 15.7%
in Spas, 11.6% in mountain resorts, 0.8 % in the Danube Delta and 12.9 % of beds on
other tourist routes and destinations.
Accomodation capacity at national level at 31 July 2002
Bucharest North – East

Cent re 3% 6%
13%
North-West
9%
West
8% South-East
48%
South-West
5%
South
8%
While the mere existence accommodation capacity does not automatically follow in that
there will be an equivalent flow of tourism arrivals and bed nights, the large differences
between Romanian regions definitely indicate that there is substantial potential for
equitable and balanced development of tourism activity in the regions.
Accommodation Nights 2002 Arrivals 2002

Region Average Stay
capacity 2002 (thou.) (thou.)
North-East 17.269 1332,0 535,3 2,5
South-East 130.111 5214,2 984,2 5,3

South 21.456 1623,2 548,9 3,0
South-West 14.855 1690,0 350,0 4,8

West 20.190 1908,7 493,1 3,9
North-West 24.561 2132,0 629,3 3,4
Centre 33.823 2316,1 752,8 3,1
Bucharest 10.331 1059,7 553,9 1,9
Romania 272.596 17276,8 4847,5 3,6
Source National Institute of Statistics – elaborated by the authors
32
Introduction to Section 2.5 Tourism NDP 2004-2006

While the differences in GDP among the regions show for the seven regions excluding
Bucharest, a maximum difference in percentage points of 25% (maximum 12% minimum
9%), while the differences among tourism flows (again excluding Bucharest) show a
maximum difference of 74% (between the South East and the North East Regions).
On the other hand the maximum difference in length of stay is at 53% between the same
two Regions. We leave out Bucharest since we consider that it is influenced by the
business activity and the leisure visitors are much fewer, thus cannot be considered a
“representative Region” in terms of tourism activity.
The regional disparities are due also to the tourism typology practiced, since the South
East Region is attracting tourists looking for the seacoast, which is by far the first choice
of destination selection for all Europeans, but the differences are nevertheless
substantial.
This must be considered along with the fact that overall arrivals have been declining.
If a “single” identifying characteristic of the problems of Romanian tourism were to be

selected, that would be that “a negative tourism flow trend has been experienced
uninter-ruptedly for the 10-year period from 1991, mainly due to decreasing
competitiveness of the Romanian tourist infrastructure, within a context of increased
traveling capacity of Romanian tourists abroad (due to both progressive liberalisation of
access to EU countries as well as growing spending capacity of Romanian tourists)”33. In
effect this indicates that Romania in general should be examined as an emerging (and
not an established) tourism destination in the context of the European Union.
Tourist Activity during 1995 – 2002
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

Number of accommodation units
2,905 2,965 3,049 3,127 3,250 3,121 3,266 3,338
- total
Of which:
private ownership (%) 11.3 18.0 22.3 27.6 35.3 55.3 60.3 64.6
Number of tourists (thousands) 7,070 6,595 5,727 5,552 5,109 4,920 4,874 4,847
tional accommodation (thousand

53,540 53,639 52,027 53,164 51,275 50,197 51,882 50,752
beds days)
e indicator of the operational
45.0 40.7 37.7 36.1 34.5 35.2 34.9 43.0
accommodation capacity (%)
The fact that the effect of the “arrivals” reduction is mainly due to the domestic market (a
provisional explanation has been already presented) also justifies that the ROP is
33
NDP 2004-2006 Section 2.5 Tourism

addressing the habits and destination selections of the Romanians themselves. THe
graph below depicts the situation:
Tourism flow analysis between domestic and foreign guests
12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001
Turists- total Turists Romanian Turists - foreigners
On the other hand, it is positive that the statistical records register an increase in foreign
currency tourism earnings, even though this should be considered just a trend and not
taken at the face value of the actual amounts increases.
The importance that

tourism can play in the
Tourism Foreign Currency Cashing
rehabilitation of the
Romanian economy is well 700
612
understood in the 600
500
500
government policies and
USD million
400 359
planning elements have 300 252
been identified. 200
100
The NDP 2004-2006 inclu- 0

1999 2000 2001 2002
ded already a measure
provision for the deve- Source: Data obtained following research and surveys ndertaken by the National Institute for Research-Development in Tourism
lopment of regional and

local tourism, particularly aimed at “developing tourism market niches, particularly stating
the niches of agro-tourism, spas and cultural heritage”.
This provision included for rehabilitation of facilities, investment in equipment and

training for personnel, and other actions, but did not specifically address the important
element of tourism promotion, critical on one hand, in order to inform the domestic
market on the offer of individual Regions, and on the other hand to making the “touristic
image of Romania” disseminated to foreign markets, where there is insufficient
recognition and inadequate descriptive perception of the available tourism products and
services.
Therefore the proposed tourism priority interventions have concentrated in two main
areas of operations:
- The first, to rehabilitate and enhance the tourism product giving emphasis on the
cultural/ historic and natural resources that Romania has in abundance;
- The second, to support interventions and activities with the scope to increase the
income (from all sources) generated from the touristic activities.
The above areas are sufficiently broad in definition, yet restricted in scope, so as to
include a variety of eligible interventions, by a wide range of potential final beneficiaries.
1 . 4 S o c i o - e c o n o m i c p r o f i l e o f t h e r e g i o n s 34
1.4.1 Region 1: North–East Region

The largest region in Romania, the North-East, with an area covering 36.850 km2, has 6
counties, Bacau, Botosani, Iasi, Neamt, Suceava and Vaslui. The region covers 15,5%
of the country’s total area.
The region’s population represents approximately 17.2% of the total Romanian

population, and that, makes North-East, the most populated region in the country. The
population density is 102 inhabitants per km2. The employment of the region represents
17,9 % of the country’s employment, and is slightly higher than the region’s population
contribution to the national population.
The unemployment rate of 6.3%, is below Romania’s average of 7.1%. Unemployment is

much higher in urban areas (10,7%), while in rural areas is at 3,8%. Most of the
employed labor force (51,2%) work in agriculture, hunting, and sylviculture activities,
while the age group 25–49 represents 59.4% of the total employment in the region.
In the enterprise sector, the number of active enterprises per thousand of active
population is at the lowest level in the country, at approximately 25, as compared to the
country average of 36.2%.
North East has the highest road density, following Bucharest – 36.2 km for every 100m2.
34
Data included in this ahapter is for 2003; Source: NIS

North-East region’s GDP per capita, is at 71,5% of Romania’s national average, and it is
the lowest among all regions.
SWOT analysis of the Region 1

Strengths Weaknesses
! The increase in regional gross value added ! Extremely high number of thousand SMEs
in industry is double compare with national to BSS available (9 = 3 IP, 2 BI, 4 CC);
average two times higher than country’s average
! The existence of three universities with (2100)
good recognition in research and ! Low level of productivity
innovation ! The highest rate of poverty in Romania
! The existence of cultural patrimony, 40,7 % (2001)
monasteries, historical monuments ! The lowest GDP per capita
belonging to UNESCO patrimony ! Low level of road infrastructure
! The European road E 85 from north to ! Underdeveloped network of utilities (natural
south and the three airports Bacau, Iasi, gas, water, sewage)
and Suceava ! Low capacity for treatment of waste water
! Low level of use of accommodation
capacity as regard to tourist potential
! Low level of entrepreneurship culture
! Lowest level of active enterprises per
thousand of active population (21)
Opportunities Threats
! Favorable geographical location at the ! To some extent a lack of economic and
north-eastern border for commercial social development measures
exchanges development ! Romania accession in EU will increase
! Downward trend of the inflation rate and of competition
the cost of money as well ! “Brain” migration to other regions or
! European funds for development countries
! Increasing trend of poverty
! Some areas of the region are exposed to
natural disasters (floods)
1.4.2 Region 2: South–East Region

Region South-East consists of 6 counties, Galati, Vrancea, Buzau, Braila Constanta
Tulcea. With a total area of 35.762 km2, it represents 13.2% of the Romania’s total
territory. The region’s population represents about 13,1% of the country’s total
population, and has a density of 80 inhabitants / km2.
The employment of the region represents 12,7 % of the country’s employment and is
less than the share of the region’s population to the country’s total population (13,1%).
The unemployment rate is 8.2%, with variance between urban (10.8%) and rural (5.1%)
areas.
The predominant activity of the employed people is agriculture, hunting, and sylviculture
(37,6%), followed by industry (20,8%), and commerce (9,7%). The age group 25–49 of

employed population represents 64,5 % of the total people employed in the South-East
Region.
The GDP per capita, is at 85,9% of Romania’s national average.
The most developed towns in the region are Constanta, Galati, Tulcea and Braila. Of the
total regional bank deposits, deposits in Constanta represent 37% and in Galati 21%
respectively. The bank deposits of enterprises in Constanta represent 52% of total
regional bank deposits.
South East is the region with the lowest Internet penetration at national level and with
the lowest mobile phone penetration.
In the South-East region, the number of active enterprises per thousand of active
population is 38 enterprises per 1000 population.

! High tourism potential (Black Sea and ! Very high number of thousand SMEs
Danube Delta, SPAs, historical (3400) to BSS available (12 - 5 IP, 2 BI, 1
monuments, attractive landscapes and CC, 1 TT, 3 STP)
historical patrimony in rural areas) ! Lack of entrepreneurial culture and
! High potential agriculture (very fertile land) management skills
! Diversified transport infrastructure ! Poor utilities infrastructure
(Constanta Port, M. Kogalniceanu airport, ! Low number (below average of about 32)
adequate railway network) of active enterprises per thousands of
! Skilled labour force active population (31)
! Existence of three high reputation ! Very low number of enterprises activating
universities Galati, Braila and Constanta) in manufacturing sectors (about 12% of the
with research capacity total active enterprises)
! Existence of a well developed ! Low level of telecommunication
telecommunication infrastructure in the infrastructure in the rural areas
urban areas ! Poor transport infrastructure in areas
(access roads) with high tourism potential
! Insufficient medical infrastructure and
personnel and more grave in rural areas
! Low level of IT&C penetration in
businesses and every day practice
! Reorganization process of the public ! Risks of floods and earthquake (high
industrial enterprises giving priority to the seismic activity in Vrancea area)
light industry (textile, craft industry, food ! Inadequate state support for unemployed
industry) people
! External aid and European funds for ! Strong competition from imported goods
development which will increase after accession
! Potential for further development of cross- ! Uncontrolled waste disposal can produce
border cooperation with Ukraine, Moldavia serious environmental damages (Galati
and Bulgaria and Constanta)
! Favoring conditions for development of ! Incompatibility between R&D goals and
trademarked local products and handicrafts market needs

! Increased possibilities for know-how
transfer, via international programmes
1.4.3 Region 3: South Region

The Region South Muntenia consists of 7 counties, Arges, Calarasi, Dambovita, Giurgiu,
Prahova, Teleorman and Ialomita. With an area of 34.453 km2, it is the third largest
region in Romania, representing 14,5% of the country’s total area.
South region’s population represents approximately 15,5% of the Romania’s total

population, and has a density of 98 inhabitants/km2. Also, South region has an aging
population with 15,2% over 65 years old. At the same time, it has the least developed
health system in the country (4.9 hospital beds per 1000 inhabitants). The region’s
degree of urbanization is at 40%, the lowest in the country.
Employment force of the South region represents 15,7 % of the country’s total
employment, and as percentage, is the same with the contribution of the region’s
population to the total country’s total population. The unemployment rate is at 7,7%,
above the country’s average, much higher in urban (10,9%) than in the rural areas (5,5
%). Most of employed labor force (41,7%) is involved in agriculture, hunting, and
sylviculture activities. The age group of 25–49 represents 62,3% of the region’s
population.
The level of GDP per capita is 80 % of the country’s average, and the active enterprises
per thousand of active population are low (25.1), as compared to the national average of
36.2.

! Existence and variety of natural resources ! Very high number of thousand SMEs
! Good location as relates to: access to (3000) to BSS available (10 - 7 IP, 2 BI, 1
Danube, proximity of the main international TT)
airport Otopeni, free zone Giugiu, ! Low development of natural gas network
modernized roads and railways) ! Public utilities networks in bad conditions
! High degree of telecommunication ! Lack of foreign direct investments
networks ! Low level of education, especially
! Well diversified economic profile entrepreneurial and management
! Well diversified tourism potential ! Absence of vocational, orientation, and
! Qualified labor force professional reconversion centers
! Young labor force
! Cross-border cooperation ! Maintaining low level of attractiveness for
! External aid and European funds for foreign investments
development ! Migration of high skilled labor force

! Development of agro-tourism ! Low level of development of rural economy
1.4.4 Region 4: South–West Region

Region 4 in Romania has 5 counties, Dolj, Gorj, Valcea, Olt and Mehedinti. With an area
of 29.212 km2, it is the smallest region in Romania, which represents 12,3% of the
country’s total area. In the region live nearly 10,7% of country’s inhabitants and the
population density is 80 inhabitants/km2.
Employment force in the region is 11.7% of the country’s employment, and, as

percentage, it is higher than the contribution of region’s population to the country’s total
population. The unemployment rate is 6%, but it is considerable higher in urban (11.1%)
than in rural (2.4%) areas. About 48.4% of the employed population is involved in
agriculture, hunting, and sylviculture, and about 20.7% in industry. The age group of 25-
49 constitutes for 60% the region’s population.
The region’s GDP per capita is 80% of the country’s average, and along with regions
North-East and South has the same, low level of number of active enterprises per
thousand of active population (24.9), as compared to the national level of 36.2.

! Tourist potential – national parks, caves, ! Relatively high number of thousand SMEs
mountains, SPAs, mineral waters, (2600) to BSS available (10 - 4 IP, 5 BI, 1
monasteries) CC)
! Area with high potential for agriculture ! Less developed infrastructure, mainly
! Traditional industries (electrotechnique, outside the urban areas, related to: roads
chemistry, and machine building) - good and weak quality were existed, utilities
endowments and specialized labor force (water, natural gas) networks, health, weak
! Craiova University – important research quality of electric power network, no
and development and IT focal point systems for waste removal and recycling,
low usage of telecommunication network
! Less developed educational infrastructure,
mainly in rural areas
! Lack of research capabilities
! Low productivity
! Lack of entrepreneurial culture
! Potential for exploiting Danube river as a ! Leave out from the information society as
low cost transportation mean result of low access to internet
! European funds for development ! Low capacity of enterprises to cope with
! Cross-border commercial exchange new EU challenges
! Good chances for industrial parks ! 10 km from Bulgarian Nuclear Power Plant
development Kozlodui
! Possibility for considering the regional ! Youth migration to urban area
section of Danube in the cruise tourist ! Accession to EU will increase competition
system ! Continue the low interest of banks to open

branches in the region
! Continue the low level of attractiveness for
investments
1.4.5 Region 5: West Region

Region West consists of 4 counties, Arad, Caras-Severin, Hunedoara and Timis. It has
an area of 32.034km2, which represents 13,44% of the Romania’s territory. West
region’s population represents 9% of Romania’s total population, and has a population
density of 61 inhabitants / km2.
The employment force comprises for 8,7% of the country’s total employed labor force,
percentage similar to the region’s population contribution to the national population (9%).
The unemployment rate is 5.9%, the lowest in the country, and relatively balanced
between urban 6.7% and rural 4.9% areas. The West region is a one of three
predominantly industrial regions in the country (Bucharest and Center being the other
two). The percentage of the employed people involved in the industry is at 29.2% of the
total region’s employment, while employment in agricultural activities is 27,6%. In
addition, compared with other regions, the West region has also a high percentage of
employed force in the age group of 25-49, this percentage at 69,1%.
This region a low level of natural increase (-4‰), the highest degree of urbanization
(61%). Moreover, the West region has the highest density of electrified railway network
behind Bucharest (2.2km per 100km2), and the most intense phone activity regarding the
automated fixed-phone services and mobile-phone penetration.
West region has the most developed health system in Romania, with 7,3 hospital beds
per 1000 inhabitants, and the most developed high school system, following Bucharest.
As expected, the region has the second highest GDP per capita in the country, after
Bucharest, and it is 8 percentage points higher than Romania’s average.

! Good geographic location: important ! Increase of unemployment
transportation (aero, auto, and railway) ! Lack of natural resources
focal point ! Deficiencies in the sanitary sector (high
! Low level of pollution costs, poor hospital endowments, etc.)
! High tourist potential –cross-border ! Lack of specialized endowments for
tourism, business tourism, diverse cultural research
patrimony, monasteries, SPAs natural ! Industrial equipment is old
reservations, lakes ! Relatively low management expertise
! Well developed education network at both ! Deteriorated utilities infrastructure in rural
levels secondary and tertiary (7 areas
universities)
! Well developed research infrastructure –
high specialized personnel and tradition
! Relatively low number of thousand SMEs
(1900) to BSS available (15 - 5 IP, 1 STP,
1 TT, 1 BI, 7 CC)
! Skilled labor force
! European funds for development ! Low capacity of enterprises to cope with
! Increasing number of investors new EU challenges
! Diversification of banking services ! Low capacity to cope with EU standards
! Cross-border cooperation ! Lack of R&D infrastructure can cause
! E-commerce youth migration
! Long distance learning ! Low level of investments in tourism
! Increasing interest in agro-tourism
1.4.6 Region 6: North–West Region

The North-West region has 6 counties, Bihor, Maramures, Satu Mare, Bistrita-Nasaud,
Salaj, and Cluj. It covers an area of 34.159 km2, which represents 14,3% of the country’s
total surface. The region has roughly 12,6% of country’s inhabitants with a population
density of 81 inhabitants/km2.
The North-West region’s employed force is at 12,5% of the total employed force in
Romania, almost the same, as percentage, with the contribution of its population in the
total country’s population (12,6%). The unemployment rate is 6%, below Romania’s
average, being 8.2% in urban and 3.8% in rural areas. Agriculture employs 33.1% of the
region’s work force, and industrial activities 28,3%. The age group of 25–49 represents
65,2% of the employed labor force.
This region has the highest number of active enterprises per thousand of active
population (41) after Bucharest, and counts for the second highest number, of regional
branches of banks (15% of the national level, out of which 50% are concentrated in
Cluj). It also has the second highest number of private companies that are bank clients,
13,8% of the national level. The North West region has the highest density of airports,
following Bucharest (2,4 per 1000km2).
The GDP per capita is at 94.1% of the Romania’s average.

! Geographical location (UKR and HU ! Weak infrastructure
borders) ! Lack of endowments for organizing fairs
! Qualified labor force and exhibitions
! High tourist potential ! Lack of development of tourist services
! Existence of available land for investments ! Lack of utilities in the rural area
! Various natural resources ! Lack of Internet usage

! IT&C sector is emerging ! Lack of connection to the main European
! Existence of well-known and appreciated transport corridors
universities in big cities ! Lack of green-field foreign investors
! To some extent a diversified economy ! Lack of entrepreneurship mentality
! Low co-financing capacity
! Low number of SMEs in the rural area
! Very high number of thousand SMEs
(3650) to BSS available (12 - 7 IP, 1 BI, 3
CC, 1 TT)
! National level increasing interest in ! Concentration of aero traffic outside the
development of tourism and agro-tourism region
! European funds for development ! Low competitiveness on long-term
! Increase in economic and cultural ! Bad management of regional resources
transnational exchanges ! Low capacity of enterprises to cope with
new EU challenges
1.4.7 Region 7: Center Region

The Center region has 6 counties, Alba, Brasov, Sibiu, Harghita, Covasna, and Mures,
and an area of 34.100km2 representing 14,3% of the Romania’s total territory. In the
region live approximately 11.7% of the country’s inhabitants having the second lowest
density in the country, at 75 inhabitants / km2.
The employment force in the region is at 11% of the country’s total employment force,
and 69% of it is in the age group of 25–49. The unemployment rate is 7.1%, equivalent
to the country’s average. The occupied labor force is predominantly working in industrial
activities, and only 36,9% is employed in agriculture.
The region has the highest bank deposits of individuals, after Bucharest (8.2% of the
national amount), the highest number of banking clients for individuals, 11% of the total
national. However, for the time being, the infrastructure is the least developed (the
lowest road density – 29,6 km of roads per 100km2).
The GDP per capita is approximately 8% above the country’s average.

! Low number of thousand SMEs (1760) to ! Lack of ring roads, and also low level of
BSS available (22 - 14 IP, 4 BI, 3 CC, 1 transport infrastructure in mountain areas
STP) (N-W of the region)
! Well location having borders with 6 other ! Low level of public transportation in big
regions cities
! Many natural reservations, 43,3 % from the ! Less developed utilities network in rural
total protected area of Romania area (water, sewage, and even electricity
! Abundance of natural resources (natural networks
gas, wood, gold-silver ores, mineral waters, ! Population’s migration outside the country
construction materials, large hydrographic ! Weak development of tourist facilities lack
network with power potential) of endowments considered necessary
! Good natural gas network ! Weak development of educational
! High degree of urbanization infrastructure and its endowments
! Good transportation and ! No quality certification for local products
telecommunication infrastructures (2 ! Lack of relationship between R&D and
airports, developed railway network, many production sectors
European roads, high use of fix and mobile ! Low number of SMEs in the rural area
communication)
! Diversified tourist potential and high
accommodation capacity (al seasons
tourism, SPA, historical monuments,
cultural objectives)
! High number of universities with research
potential, and a good vocational training
network
! Best practice in healthy emergency system
! Good relationships with Romanian ! Lack of co-financing for various EU funds
diaspora which can improve commercial ! Low level of financing support for R&D
and cultural exchanges activities
! European funds for development ! Deterioration of tourist objectives
! Integration within the European system of ! The high level of pollution in certain areas
preserving biodiversity of flora, fauna, and can cause deterioration of vegetation and
habitat soil erosion
! Good geographical location for European ! No alternatives available for work force
projects for infrastructure development from restructured industries
! Increase world demand for cultural tourism, ! Low capacity of enterprises to cope with
eco-tourism, and SPA tourism new EU challenges
1.4.8 Region 8: Bucharest Region

The smallest in the country in terms of area covered. With only 1821km2 it represents
0,8% of the country’s total area. The region has Bucharest metropolitan area, and the
Ilfov County. With a population density of 1212inhabitants/ km2, Bucharest-Ilfov
represents 10.2% of the country’s total population.
The employment force represents is 9.8% of the total employed force in the country. The
percentage of age group 25–49 in the region’s employment is 75%, the highest in the
country. The regional unemployment rate is 8.6%, being the only region in the country
where urban is less than rural unemployment, 8.5 % and 9.1% respectively.
The region reports the highest GDP per capita, over two times more than the country’s
average.

! The best number of thousand SMEs (1100) ! Low cooperation between universities and
to BSS available (62 - 6 IP, 5 BI, 9 CC, 1 business sector
STP, 9 TT, 32 BA) ! Low managerial culture
! The highest attractiveness of investments ! Low quality of road transport infrastructure
! The most important transportation (roads, ! Lack of water and sewage networks in the
railway, aero) focal point rural areas and Bucharest periphery
! Telecommunication infrastructure well ! High level of pollution
developed ! Low level of endowments in the rural
! Developed financial and banking services localities
! Concentration of various R&D domains
! The best education infrastructure
! The highest density of SMEs
! European funds for development ! Brain migration
! E-commerce ! Utilities prices increase
! Long distance learning ! Budget cuts for health, research and
development, and education
1.4.9 Structure of settlement

The settlement structure of the Regions differs slightly from the national average
population density of 91 inhabitants/km2. The lowest density is in West Region 61
inhabitants per km2, and, except Bucharest, the highest is in North-East 102 inhabitants /
km2, which together with the South Region (98 inhabitants / km2) are the only regions
above country’s average population density.
A relative balance between shares of urban population 53.4% and rural population
46,6% characterize the settlement structure, at a national level. Three regions, North-
East, South, and South-West have the share of urban population less than 50% (the
lowest being South 40,7% and North-East 40,8%), and five regions above 50% (the
highest shares registering in Bucharest 88,8 % and West 61,7 %).
There are 186 towns with over 10,000 inhabitants (except Bucharest), out of which 10
towns have over 200,000 inhabitants (Iasi - North-East, Braila, Constanta, and Galati –
South-East, Ploiesti – South, Craiova – South-West, Timisoara – West, Oradea, and
Cluj-Napoca – North-West, and Brasov - Center).

The size structure of towns
Share of the
Group of towns according to Number of Population of the
number of town
population towns towns
inhab. in %
More than 200.000 11 4.714.711 40,6
100 000 – 199.999 14 1.902.951 16,4
50 000 – 99.999 21 1.512.034 13,0
20 001 – 49.999 59 1.808.819 15,6
10 000 – 19.999 83 1.127.090 9,7
5 000 – 9.999 65 495.489 4,3
2 000 – 4.999 12 45.881 0,4
Under 2.000 1 1.760 *
Total 266 11 608 235 100.0
Source : National Institute of Statistics – Romanian Statistical Yearbook 2003 – July 1, 2002
After 1990 the constant increase in the percentage of urban population not only
stagnated, but also slightly decreased with 1 percent from 54,3 % in 1990 to 53,3 % in
2002.
1. 5 SWO T a na l ysi s
The situation analysis of the regions presented in the previous paragraphs of the
Programme document allows the identification of the strategic challenges faced by
Romania in the field of regional economic development and the potential contribution of
the ROP through the implementation of specific development interventions and
dissemination of new ways for applying policies in the selected sectors of activity
covered by the ROP priorities, in order to tackle regional despirities and achieve the
regional convergence in terms of development and social cohesion.
As derived from the correlation of the development objectives and needs of the regions,
the following SWOT analysis gives particular emphasis on highlighting the most
important strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of the regions, consolidated
and presented at country level.

Consolidated SWOT analysis of the Romanian regions
! Geographical location – access to ! High regional disparities related to

S W
Black Sea socio-economic development
T
! Skilled labor force (especially in the ! Low work productivity E
R
fields of engineering and IT) ! Lack of entrepreneurial culture and
E A
N ! Existence of various natural management skills
resources ! Not adequate penetration of IC&T K
G
T ! The second largest market in CEE in education and businesses N
H ! Diversified tourism attractions ! Regional disparities in attracting
S ! Developed rail and water way FDI E
transport network ! Not balanced distribution of S
! Existence of fertile lands for use in existing Business Support
agriculture Structures across the regions S
! Tradition in research and ! Limited Business Support Services E
development available to businesses
! Difficult access to finance for SMEs S
! Concentration of most RDI
resources in Bucharest
! Low level of penetration of RDI
outcomes to enterprises
! Outdated transport infrastructure
! Lack of basic public utilities (water
and sewage) in rural areas
! Insufficient health/social services
support schemes to reflect
demographic changes (i.e. ageing)
! Undeveloped tourism infrastructure
! Undeveloped waste management
systems
! Reduced awareness on
environmental issues
! Access to EU markets and know-how ! Migration of skilled and high
O educated labor force to other
T
! Capitalize on construction of the
P European transportation corridors countries H
P ! Capitalize on the access to Black ! Continued lack of links between
R
O Sea (transit ports) Research, Development and
! Liberalization of energy and natural Innovation goals and market needs E
R
gas markets ! No much correlation between
T tertiary education curricula and A
! Potential to increase the FDI
U market needs T
! Opportunity to bring skilled
N Romanians back ! Ageing population
S
I ! Use of SF assistance for balanced ! Continued insufficient funds
T development in the regions allocation to RDI and education
I ! Tourism potential ! Environment risks from natural
disasters
E ! Increased need for waste
management systems ! Environment risks related to
S obsolete production methods

1.6 Attractiveness of the Romanian regions
The attractiveness of the Romanian regions is an important factor of concern in the
framework of the country’s regional development strategy. Areas with socio-economic
potential generally attract investment, as they tend to offer adequate infrastructure,
human resources and business
opportunities. However, less developed
areas may become attractive for certain
categories of investors, generally risk-
takers, willing to benefit from the
incentives available for investments in
these particular areas or niche players
looking for very specific resources.
According to a recent survey35, the
Regions Attractiveness Index (RAI) of
the Romanian regions presents the
distribution shown on the map herewith.
RAI calculation is based on all socio-economic, social life and living standards indices.
According to the RAI distribution, Bucharest appears to be a distinctive region. Its high
attractiveness (RAI 87,2) is due to the fact that it is the country capital, the financial and
administrative hub, hence concentrating most of the resources and activities. Although
the demographic factors of the Bucharest region were among the poorest in the country,
the region outpaces all the other regions in terms of the business profile and social life
and living standards factors. The factors
included in the analysis of the regional
demographic profile describe the age
structure of the population, the natural
increase of the population and the
urbanization degree.
The factors included in the analysis of the

regional business environment describes
the political and administration
environment, the labour market and
wages, the economic environment, the
private sector and market competition,
35
Romanian Business Digest 2005.

foreign investment, foreign trade, infrastructure and prices for real estate. The analysis
shows that the second most active region after Bucharest is Region West (which
includes the counties of Timis, Arad, Hunedoara and Caras Severin) – RAI 20.7.
In addition to this, other factors were examined, which describe the regional social and
living standard (e.g. telecommunications, health, education, bank accounts, internet
users, household equipment, holidays and spare time spending, average prices for basic
products).
The North-West region (which includes

the counties of Bihor, Satu Mare,
Maramures, Salaj, Cluj, Bistrita-Nasaud)
is placed second after the Bucharest
region, with an RAI of 18.3 (third comes
the Centre – Sibiu, Alba, Mures,
Harghita, Covasna, Brasov – RAI 15.8).
The Bucharest region was revealed all

the times as an atypical region. Not all
the factors that compose the RAI are
ranking high, though (e.g. demographic,
prices and rent levels for the real
estate). This allows the other regions to surmount the difference among them.
The loss of the North-East RAI is mainly because of the set of factors within the
business environment category; it counts for almost 60% of the difference between this
region and the benchmark. The factors that mostly make this dissimilarity are the labour
market and wages, the foreign trade, the economic environment measured as the
GDP/capita factor, and the foreign investment.
The South region has also a significant attractiveness loss due to the wages and labour
members, foreign investment, but also because of the health and education system.
The South-West region’s sensitive factors are the labour market, private sector and
market competition and foreign investment (it’s the most modest in the country), and this
was reflected in one third of the loss in the RAI.
The South-East region lost almost 45 points in RAI mainly due to business environment
factors, especially due to political and administration environment, labour market and
wage indicators, private sector and market competition.
The Central Region is made up of the counties Alba, Brasov, Covasna, Harghita, Mures
and Sibiu. It has the highest deposits of individuals, after Bucharest (8.2% of the national

amount), the highest number of banking clients, individuals, 11% din total national, the
highest amount of bank deposits of individuals, following Bucharest (ROL 8.1 million per
person).
The West region ranks third overall. Although labour market, wages and foreign
investment are one of the highest in the country, they are far below the benchmark; an
improvement of these indicators will positively influence the RAI in the future.
The region ranks second after Bucharest-Ilfov. For the North- West region, the labour
market and wages, foreign investment, as well as private sector and market competition
factors have boosted the region’s RAI.
1.7 EU support programmes and pre-accession

instruments
As it is stipulated in the Accession Partnership between the EU and Romania, the
medium-term priority in the field of economic and social cohesion is: “to develop national
policy for economic and social cohesion; prepare for the implementation of regional
development programmes as well as Community initiatives; improve inter-ministerial co-
ordination for structural funds and establish a budgetary system and procedures allowing
for multi-annual commitments and manage it according to structural funds standards,
including appraisal and evaluation". Thus, Romania benefits of important pre-structural
funding aimed to assist its legislative, institutional and human resources transition
towards the complex and integrated system, on which is based the EU cohesion policy.
This assistance is granted through the Phare programme and the pre-accession
instruments ISPA and SAPARD, which since 2002 focus their support to the Accession
Partnership priorities.
The total volume of Phare programme assistance made available to Romania is of €2.1
billion in the period 1992-2003 and of €160 million for 2004. ISPA budget commited to
date is € 1.4 billion for the perid 2000-2004 with a forecast of €710 million in the period
2005-2006. Under SAPARD Romania has received 632 million euro in the period 2000-
2003 and the 2004 allocation is estimated to 158.7 million euro.
The Phare programme
The Phare programme allocated commitments of € 2 billion to Romania during the 1992-
2002 period, with commitments of €265.5 million in 2002 and of €405.3 million in 2004.
The Phare programme provides support for institution building, investment to strengthen

the regulatory infrastructure needed to ensure compliance with the acquis, and
investment in economic and social cohesion. Phare also helps Romania develop the
mechanisms and institutions that will be needed to implement the Structural Funds
assistance after the accession and is supported by a limited number of measures
(investment and grant schemes) with a regional or thematic focus.
For the period 2004-2006 the Phare programme supports the implementation of a multi-
annual regional development policy, through horizontal - regional and sectoral - priorities
and measures, taken out of the NDP 2004-2006, in order to support Romania to
progressively attain the average development level of the EU Member States.
The overall objectives of the Phare 2004 –2006 ESC Programme, are focusing on three
main directions:
! to address the regional disparities through investment support in different

economic and social fields;
! to support the management and efficient implementation of the 2004 – 2006

Phare assistance for Economic and Social Cohesion under EDIS;
! to support the development of institutional capacity of the future structures to

effectively manage Structural Funds, after accession.
The socio-economic, sectoral and regional analyses carried out in the NDP 2004-2006
have pointed out high disparities between Romania and EU Member States regarding
general economic and social development. At the same time, the analyses emphasize
the increasing inter and intra regional disparities in terms of social and economic
development, caused by market economy mechanisms and possibly, by the
implementation of sectoral development programmes. Through the implementation of
specific regional measures in areas facing severe economic and social decline the
Phare Programming Document (PPD) contributes, together with national investment
programmes, to the diminishing of the development disparities between Romania as a
whole and the average EU Member States.
During 2004-2006 measures for improving tourism, transport, business infrastructure,

and industrial sites rehabilitation, which are still deficitary in Romania, are needed in
order to achieve the European standard quality. Increasing the competitiveness of
private enterprises and, as a consequence, their potential of creating new jobs is another
priority, which needs support in that period. Therefore, financial support and consulting
for start-ups, micro and SMEs will be provided, taking into consideration that these
represent the economic sector with the most dynamic growth and the main job provider.
PPD 2004-2006 also includes measures for a better use and development of human

resources (tackling structural unemployment, fighting social exclusion and social
assistance, improving labour market adaptability and improving access to education),
and for environment protection at regional level.
At the same time it addresses the necessity to continue the administrative capacity
building at national and regional levels. In this respect, the PPD 2004-2006 addresses
the need of developing the institutional capacity of the line ministries, RDAs and local
authorities. This implies the developing of structures, strategies, human resources and
management capacity which is envisaged to have a positive impact on the overall
Romania’s administrative capacity, meaning:
! more efficient Phare projects implementation on short term;
! an appropriate Structural Funds institutional and management system in place on

long term.
ISPA & SAPARD
Aid for agricultural and rural development (SAPARD) and a structural instrument giving
priority to measures in the transport and environmental sectors (ISPA), were introduced
in the package of pre-accession assistance granted to Romania, in 2000.
ISPA programming is governed by the national strategy papers for transport and the
environment, which the Romanian authorities finalised in 2000. The strategic objectives
in the field of transport address serious weaknesses in the network of roads and railways
and are focused on the modernisation of the trans-European corridors crossing the
country. Other priorities are dealing with increased traffic levels around urban areas and
developing the use of waterways.
In the environment sector, Romania faces acute problems concerning air, water and soil
pollution - all of which require large-scale investments from both the public and the
private sectors. The major environmental impact is the poor quality of water, which
results from the discharge of untreated or partially treated wastewater. Another major
cause of environmental damage and related health hazards is the uncontrolled disposal
of (mainly urban) waste.
Under ISPA, commitments made to Romania were of € 256.5 million in 2002, of € 255.1
million in 2003 and of € 272.3 million in 2004 in support of both transport (EUR 149.6
million) and environmental projects (EUR 122.7 million).
The Romanian SAPARD programme has been approved in November 2000, followd by
approval, in December 2000, of the “National Plan for Agriculture and Rural

Development 2000-2006” (NPARD), which forms the basis for the implementation of the
SAPARD in Romania.
To achieve the objectives of NPARD, the strategy for SAPARD takes into consideration
the measures and priorities described in the Council Regulation no.1268/1999 (Art.2 and
Art.4.3). Out of the 15 eligible measures, Romania has chosen 11, regrouped in the four
priorities, as follows:
1. Improving the access to markets and of the competitiveness of agricultural

processed products (processing and marketing of agricultural and fisheries products;
improving the structures for quality, veterinary, and plant-health controls, foodstuffs
and consumer protection)
2. Improving infrastructures for rural development and agriculture (development and

improvement of rural infrastructure; management of water resources for agriculture)
3. Development of rural economy (investments in agricultural holdings; setting-up

producer groups; agri-environmental measures; development and diversification of
economic activities, multiple activities, alternative income; forestry)
4. Development of human resources (improving of the vocational training; technical

assistance)
The Community allocated EUR 158.7 million for implementation of the SAPARD
programme in Romania in 2004.
Other Sources of EU Funding
Other EU assistance is granted to Romania, especially from the European Investment

Bank, which provides large-scale loans to projects aimed at helping the transition to a
market-based economy and meeting the acquis. EIB action is co-ordinated with the
PHARE programme, as well as with EU Member States' financing institutions and with
the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. Since 1990, the EIB has
granted loans to the value of €3.00 billion. Three quarters of this funding has been for
investments in the transport sector.
Romania also benefits from Phare funded multi-country and horizontal programmes
such as TAIEX (technical assistance on the approximation of EU legislation) and SIGMA
(Support for Improvement in Governance and Management)

2. REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC
OBJECTIVES
2.1 National strategic reference framework for
supporting the balanced development of the
regions
The sixth development priority of the National Development Plan (NDP 2007-2013) of
Romania, refers to “Supporting the balanced development of all Romania’s regions” and
includes the analysis of the priority objectives for the “promotion of a balanced territorial
development by creating the conditions for the diminishing of the inter and intra-regional
disparities, stimulating the areas and towns lagging behind, as well as the ones with
economic growth potential”.
The national strategic framework of reference for the ROP brings a justification of the
proposed prioritization of the actions, based on the analysis of the current needs and
development trends of a differentiated territorial impact of economical growth processes,
and highlighting a number of inter and intra-regional discrepancies.
2.1.1 Analysis of the needs

According to the analysis provided in the NDP 2007-2013, the major regional disparities
and development shortcomings may be summarized as follows:
! The need to improve the general regional activity intensity, by creating

economical opportunities with the help of a balanced distribution and appropriate
investments in the transport, social and business infrastructure, as well by
making use of the existing tourist and cultural potential;
! The need to stop economical decline and to block the potential cut-off of certain
areas from the economical growth process, namely certain rural and mining
areas as well as mono-industrial cities affected by the industrial restructuring
process, and facing adaptation problems concerning new activities;
! The need to support revitalization of medium and large city centers in order to
allow them to act as economic growth centers, thus contributing to minimizing
discrepancies between cities and their adjacent areas (either urban or rural) that
have weak structures (territorial gaps);

! The need to support the administrative decentralization process and to invest in
the following growth of the development planning/programming capacity at a
regional/local level, by creating the conditions necessary for a comprehensive
implementation of the decentralization principle, as stipulated by Law no.
339/2004, including for the cross-border and international cooperation activities.
More specifically:
The need to improve the general activity intensity of the Regions
On the background of a low national development level, there is a high level of

discrepancies both between Romania and the EU and between various regions of the
country. Thus, in 2002, the GDP per inhabitant (PPS) ranged between 19,5% from the
EU-25 average (the North-east Region) and 64,8% (the Bucharest-Ilfov Region).
Furthermore, besides the Bucharest-Ilfov Region, the GDP per inhabitant values of all
the other regions are lower than the minimum EU-25 value (32%).
Previous experience has proven that in Romania, all investments and business
opportunities tend to focus in a limited number of areas. Bucharest alone focuses 20% of
the total number of SMEs in the country and attracted over 50% of the total volume of
direct foreign investments (DFI). Besides Bucharest, five counties attracted 25% of the
DFI, while the others were left with practically an insignificant volume of DFI. This also
originated in the precarious situation of basic infrastructure equipment having a key role
in attracting investments and supporting economical growth: un-repaired county and
village roads (between 80% in the South-West and 97% in the South-East), over 55%
un-repaired city streets throughout all the regions, a large number of localities without
drinking water mains (between 65% in the North-West and 87% in the South-West) and
pipes (95%), damaged school buildings (between 68% in the Center and 90% in the
North-East), numerous hospitals that require refurbishment and updating.
The need to stop economical decline and to block the potential cut-off of certain areas
from the economical growth process, namely certain rural and mining areas as well as
mono-industrial cities affected by the industrial restructuring process or traditionally
under-developed areas
Currently there is a low risk for some areas of the country to be cut off from the
economical growth process, due to the following self-supporting factors: 1) population
aging 2) strong dependency of a limited number of economical sectors having low
added-value and weak innovational capacities. 3) no basic conditions for attracting
investments, 4) inadequately skilled work force. This situation is a characteristic of not
only rural or mining areas, but also of mono-industrial cities and of the suburbs of large

cities that have been affected by industrial restructuring and are not left without urban
functionalities, especially in the field of public services, and require urgent action for
stopping such phenomena. The same thing can be said about the excess dependency of
certain areas still undergoing a serious industrial restructuring process. Current as well
as potential problems posed by economical cut-off differ from one region to another,
which requires a punctual approach, adapted to local requirements and, more
importantly, aiming at sectors with growth potentials.
A characteristic of the Romanian urban network is its numerous small and average
towns (90% of the total), with insufficiently developed urban functions and a loss-making
infrastructure. After the 90s, the industrial restructuring process affected first and
foremost mono-structural urban centers that lost or are about to loose their urban
functions. City population dropped (from 12,4 mil. inhabitants in 1995 to 11,6 mil.
inhabitants in 2003), which is an unique phenomenon in Europe. The main reasons
behind this decrease in urban population are the migration towards the rural
environment as well as abroad. At the same time, other demographic phenomena
contributed to decreasing the number of urban population, such as a negative natural
growth, even if to a much lower extent. As a result, the structure of the network of
localities changed: the number of small towns decreased and the number of large towns
increased. Despite the fact that Romania has a dense urban network, and that many
urban centers have the potential to become economical growth centers at a regional
level, there are few economic links between the urban centers and the surrounding
areas, both the urban and the rural ones, since their manner of development was
conceived independently.
Despite all the difficult times the small and medium towns are going through, throughout
the country, the general development discrepancies between the urban and the rural
environments are increasing, outlined by the employment degree and skills of the
population, by all types of infrastructural equipment (accessibility – new roads,
telecommunications, water and pipe mains, public lighting, educational infrastructure -
schools, kindergartens, libraries, hospitals etc.), by the existing medical services,
attracting investors, number of non agricultural SMEs etc. Economical activities in the
rural environment are under-developed and poorly varied of all SMEs were operating in
the rural environment, most of them micro-enterprises, involved in craftwork). One
enterprise out of six, that specializes in non-agricultural activities, operate in the rural
environment, but their productivity is much lower in the urban environment.
The risks are very high for the rural areas where factors such as low accessibility, low
population density, high levels of agricultural-oriented population, many older people,
low-skilled work force combine, which results in a total lack of interest from the investors,
and consequently in the lack of local employment opportunities. The same situation
characterizes the industrial declining areas, which attract limited investments, have a
low-skilled and aged work force and low or even lacking employment opportunities.
Furthermore, these urban centers frequently have low economic profiles and lack urban
functions, especially public services. One of the peculiarities of Romania is the mosaic
distribution of such areas, throughout the country. Within one region there are
predominantly agricultural districts as well as more industrial ones. The unemployment
rate differs from one county to another, from 3,3% (which practically means full
employment of the work force) to 10,8%. The weight of the agricultural population is
between 10% and 60%. The existence of numerous mono-industrial declining towns
completes the picture.
The need to support revitalization of medium and large city centers in order to allow
them to act as economic growth centers, thus contributing to minimizing discrepancies
between cities and their adjacent areas (either urban or rural) that have weak structures
(territorial gaps).
The increased growth of the importance of the Bucharest area is one of the most
important characteristics of the economic development of Romania in the last 10 years.
In 1995, The Bucharest-Ilfov Region, which is the most thriving, had an average income
level 1,7 times larger than that of the poorest region, namely the North-East Region.
According to the latest statistic data available, this ratio has currently reached 3.
With a population slightly over 10,1% of the country’s population, Bucharest contributes
to 21% of the GDP, since it contains 21,4 % of the total number of active local
enterprises. Up until now, the Capital attracted over half of the total number of foreign
direct investment and it was one of the few areas that recorded a strong positive internal
migration. It is important to mention the fact that the number of students in the Capital
increased from 136.344 during the academic year 1995/1996 to 178,832 during the
academic year 2002/2003. Here is where the majority of the research and development
institutes are located.
It is also important to mention the increasing significance of the capital, as a more and
more important European metropolis, which competes and cooperated with other
capitals in the area, such as Budapest, Sofia, Bratislava, Belgrade and Vienna. These
are centers that made the most out of the transition towards market economy.
There are discrepancies inside large cities as well, which result from the high level of
attractiveness of certain areas of these cities by comparison to other areas, not
necessarily on the periphery. The most obvious example in this direction is the blatant
difference between the prices of plots of land. In the capital for instance, the prices for

plots of land in the northern area, which is extremely desirable, are 10 times as high as
the prices for southern or eastern plots of land, less attractive to investors, where
investments are also much lower.
The space aspect of economic growth will focus on the competition between Bucharest
and the other South-Eastern capitals, for high level urban functions, as well as promoting
the desirability and environment conditions of medium and average urban centers, that
may make them act as regional centers/growth centers. This requires large efforts for
creating urban renovation and cultural policy programs (especially within the capital),
and first and foremost investments in basic public facilities and services (such as public
transport, health protection, the management of water and waste distribution systems)
as well as renovating disused industrial sites that may provide the needed space for
developing new activities. This type of investment is a pre-condition for a subsequent
approach of the economic, social and environment problems the large cities have to
face.
In order to support the development of high level urban functions of such cities, their role
of regional urban centers spreading development in their adjacent areas will be
consolidated, which will result in a balanced territorial development and an increased
territorial economical and social.
Supporting the administrative decentralization process and developing the

planning/programming capacity at a regional/local level, for development programs.
Romania has initiated the process of decentralizing administrative responsibilities for

local authorities. This not only involved more clear regulations concerning urban services
(drinking water, residual waters, solid waste, heating at county level, and local transport),
but also new responsibilities in the educational sector and in providing health and social
security services. But this process is still implemented and needs a long time before
conclusions can be drawn. While recognizing the full validity of the principle of
subsidiarity and the fact that local authorities are in a better position to provide
management for public interventions, tightly connected to planning and programming
various uses of the territory, one must also add that time and resources are needed in
order to develop work skills and experience within an European framework of regional
development at European standards, so that regional programming can replace national
interventions, both at a regional and local level. This is necessary, although it must be
mentioned that the level of such difficulties varies depending on the areas of
intervention.
The strategy detailed in the following lines is based on basic principles of the acquis
communautaire, such as the principle of subsidiarity and strategic orientation of the

European Spatial development Strategy, and it reflects at the same time the current
stage of the decentralization process in Romania, as detailed in the Frame Law no.
339/2004 concerning Decentralization and other relevant laws concerning
decentralization.
2.1.2 The NDP 2007-2013 Regional Development Priority

The general objective of the national priority for regional development consists in:
diminishing development disparities between regions, as well as intra-regional –
between different areas, urban and rural areas, between urban centre and adjoining
areas, for supporting both the underdeveloped areas and also some centre with
economic growth potential, so as to reduce the development differences (measured by
regional GDP, the current record being of 1 to 3) between the most and the less
developed region.
For achieving this general objective the NDP 2007-2013 regional strategy articulates
around the following specific objectives:
# Increase regions’ competitiveness as business locations
# Support of regional/local economies affected by industrial restructuring or

traditionally underdeveloped (border areas, mountain areas, etc)
# Capitalize regions’ cultural and tourist potential and increase their contribution to the
regions’ development
# Stop the decline of urban areas and revitalize the urban centres with potential of
becoming development poles of the regional development
# Strengthening of local authorities’ programming and development management

capacity
Increase regions’ competitiveness as business locations
This specific objective is generated by the need to improve the general attractiveness
degree of the regions and to ensure a better distribution of the opportunities at regional
level for attracting investments, including direct foreign investments for improving their
transport, social and business infrastructure.
Support of regional/local economies affected by industrial restructuring or traditionally

underdeveloped (border areas, mountain areas, etc)

This objective aims at the development, on innovative basis, of local and regional
economies, facilitating the SMEs’ access to innovative technologies and services – by
creating necessary connexions between productive activities and RDI activities.
Capitalize regions’ cultural and tourist potential and increase their contribution to the
This specific objective is generated by the need to increase regions’ attractiveness

degree by using the specific cultural and tourist potential existing in all eight regions, by
creating appropriate infrastructures, developing alternative tourism forms, protecting and
promoting the natural and cultural heritage.
Stop the decline of urban areas and revitalize the urban centres with potential of
becoming development poles of the regional development
This objective aims at stopping the economic decline of the urban areas affected by
industrial restructuring and reinforce the network of urban centres with development
potential allowing them to act as engines of economic development and to contribute in
diminishing the discrepancies between the urban centre and the poorly structured
adjoining areas (urban or rural).
The achievement of this objective will lead to reaching an urban/rural population record
closer to the average level in the EU member states.
Strengthening the local authorities’ capacity of programming and development

management
The NDP 2007-2013 regional development strategy anticipates the support of a large
range of regional or local development programmes, for whose implementation the main
responsibility will fall on the regional implementation mechanisms and on local
authorities.
As presented in the above paragraphs, the Romanian NDP 2007-2013 provides the
overall strategies and conditions for growth and competitiveness of the regions and
encourages actions aimes to tackle inter and intra-regional disparities. It constitutes the
national strategic framework of reference for the development of the Structural Funds
programming documents, including the ROP “Regional Development” for the period
2007-2013. The Romanian ROP priorities fully correspond to the scope and strategic
objectives of the national plan and assume the full utilization of all available resources to
the achievement of its goals.

The architecture of the Romanian ROP as regards the NDP 2007-2013 priorities
NDP 2007-2013 ROP 2007-2013
Increase regions’ Priority 1:

competitiveness Improvement of regional
as business locations and local public infrastructure
Support of regional/local
Priority 2:
economies affected by
Strengthening of local
industrial restructuring or
traditionally underdeveloped and regional economies
Capitalize regions’ cultural

Priority 3:
and touristic potential and
Development of regional
Increase their contribution to the
regions’ development and local tourism
Stop the decline of urban areas and

revitalize the urban centers with Priority 4:
potential of becoming development Urban development
poles of the regional development
Strengthening of local
authorities’ programming Priority 5:
and development Technical Assistance
management capacity
Provisions are also made to ensure complementarity with the actions of the Sectoral
Operational Programmes, in the framework of the national regional development policy
and the social and economic cohesion policy of the EU.
The correlation between the NDP2007-2013 regional development objectives and the
ROP “Reginal Development” priorities is shown in the following table:

becoming development
economies affected by
ceters with potential of

industrial restructuring
management capacity
touristic potential and
NDP
Strengthening of the
poles of the regional
regions’cultural and
competitveness as
Stop the decline of

business locations
revitilise the urban

contribution to the
programming and
Incerase regions’
urban areas and
local authorities’
underdeveloped
objectives
or traditionally
increase their
regional/local
development
development
Support of
Capitalize
ROP priorities
Improvement of
regional and
local public
x x x x
infrastructure
Strengthening
of local and
regional
x x x x
economies
Development of
regional and x x
local tourism
Urban
development
x x x
Technical
Assistance
x
2.2 Objectives and development principles of the

ROP
2.2.1 Strategic objectives
As it has been analysed in the previous chapter, Regional Development Policies are
directly linked to the National Priorities, and to the regional and local needs. Romanian
regional development policies, under the Structural Funds, aim at improving the
standards of living in Romania, contributing to the elimination of regional disparities.
Taking into consideration the key objective of fostering the Romanian regions’
convergence with those of the European Union, the limited budgetary resources made
available vis-à-vis the existing development needs, as well as the lessons learned and
the requirements of the Union’s “growth and jobs agenda”, this has to be put forth
through tailored support to concrete actions, concentrated where needs are greatest,
and aimed at:
! promoting growth and strengthening the economy as a whole;

! enhancing competitiveness and employment, as set out in the renewed Lisbon
strategy, through the creation of a business-friendly environment capable of
attracting investment and strengthening innovation and entrepreneurship;
! establishing high quality and safe transport networks and providing basic
infrastructures; and
! improving the human capital and human resources capacity of all Romanian
regions, thereby also safeguarding the availability of a qualified workforce and the
effective use of the resources available.
2.2.2 Specific objectives of the Romanian ROP

Regional development is based on a range of structural, economic, socio-cultural, spatial
and international conditions. The success of Romania’s regional development policy
requires, and depends on, a comprehensive and balanced planning in order to
overcome the existing regional disparities, to contribute to the formation of a new, more
balanced relation between urban and rural areas through ensuring a minimum level of
access to services of general economic interest throughout the country’s territory, as
well as to provide for the improvement of the efficiency and accessibility of the country’s
infrastructure network, the preservation and development of its natural and cultural
heritage, the efficient management of its natural resources resulting to the overall
improvement of the citizens’ quality of life.
This integrated regional development strategy will help Romania’s efforts to achieve its
full integration in the EU and to improve the development potential of all Romanian
regions, by promoting structural change and exploiting the potential for higher
productivity and employment. Long-term growth and real convergence with the EU
regions is the ultimate goal of this strategy.
Within this framework, Romania aims to achieve four main objectives:
Objective 1: Improvement of regional and local public infrastructure
The availability of the necessary infrastructure is a key precondition for the realisation of
the ‘growth and net jobs creation’ objective.
Investments in transport infrastructure in all Romanian regions will facilitate the

movement of people and goods, reduce transactions costs and improve access to
markets and regional networks, thus raising efficiency and enhancing opportunities for
trade and productive investments. The development of transport networks will also
facilitate interregional cooperation and contribute significantly to improved enterprise

competitiveness and labour force mobility, and therefore to the faster development of
Romania as a whole as well as of its individual regions. Given the specific needs and
development levels of the regions concerned, with underdeveloped and inadequate
transport infrastructure and incomplete basic networks, it is reasonable to anticipate very
high economic returns to such investment.
Investments in other basic infrastructures are also essential, in order to guarantee a

better quality of life, and better education and training opportunities for the population.
Investments in the development and modernisation of the country’s social infrastructure
will contribute to the improvement of the quality and efficiency of the country’s health
care and education services, and to the sustainable development of the regions, through
rehabilitating their physical endowment, upgrading the operation of the existing
structures, and introducing modern management, administration and control systems.
Provision is also made for ensuring the transfer of knowledge and technology, through
the integration and appropriate use of modern equipment and information and
communication technologies, in order to enhance both the services delivery and
management systems.
In addition to improving the quality of life and living standards, investment in health care
promotion and health risks/disease prevention has a direct effect on competitiveness,
productivity and social cohesion. By helping to maintain and prolong labour force
participation in the economy, it maximises the citizens’ economic contribution and
reduces dependency levels. Filling the gaps in the quality of, and access to, health
infrastructure - and improving the delivery of health services to the less favoured areas -
are therefore reasonably expected to boost the economic development of the Romanian
regions.
In line with the Lisbon objective to expand and increase investment in human capital,
investments in education infrastructure is a key precondition for the introduction and
implementation of any reforms in Romania’s ineffective education and training systems.
Across the country’s territory, an “adequate supply of attractive, accessible and high
quality education system” is far from guaranteed. Therefore, investments in crucial
education and skills development infrastructure, in addition to reducing educational
disparities and creating equal educational opportunities between regions and citizens,
are also expected to enhance access to employment, quality at work and to raise
productivity levels for the benefit of individuals, enterprises, the economy and society.
Objective 2: Strengthening of regional and local economies
The state and condition of Romania’s business infrastructure is a crucial factor for the
economic and social attractiveness of the regions, and severely affects the performance

of local and regional enterprises and the quality of its human resources. Investment in
modern business infrastructure in the lagging Romanian regions will be a key instrument
for achieving greater integration and strengthening the international competitiveness of
the regional economies, especially in the context of the enlarged European Union,
thereby enabling them to utilise their competitive advantages, to tap their underutilised
resources and to mobilise endogenous productive potential. Such investments can also
be justifiably expected to foster growth across the country and reinforce the Romanian
regions’ convergence with the rest of the Union.
In the context of the revised Lisbon strategy, it is also necessary to invest in modernising
the regional and local productive sectors, through the promotion of entrepreneurship and
facilitation of new firms (business start-ups), support to innovation and to the
dissemination and use of new knowledge by firms, and to the creation of
links/partnerships between the industry and research institutions capable of exploiting
the potential synergies between them “based on a long-term vision and clear market
orientation”, thereby allowing the regional/local productive sectors to make commercial
use of the RTD results.
Provision is also made for ensuring that improved, readily available and easy to access
business support services are available to enterprises in all regions. These services are
of a paramount importance for the existing and newly created firms, particularly the
SMEs, in order to increase their competitiveness, productivity and product quality, and to
be able to internationalise, thus seizing the opportunities afforded by Romania’s access
to the internal market.
Objective 3: Development of regional and local tourism
Investing in key economic development sectors, such as tourism and culture, will allow
the Romanian regions, taking advantage of their natural and cultural assets, to improve
their comparative advantage in high value added sectors, and to upgrade the quality and
knowledge content of their respective products in both traditional and newly emerging
markets.
The planned interventions include:
! the expansion of the tourist product mix by creating the appropriate infrastructure and
developing and marketing new products for alternative forms of tourism, based on an
upgraded, regionalised tourism development strategy;
! development of targeted actions for the protection and promotion of the natural and
cultural heritage, in the context of an integrated approach to sustainable tourism
development, dedicated to quality.

Objective 4: Support for urban development
Urban rehabilitation initiatives focus on targeted actions in support of integrated,

partnership-based urban regeneration interventions, giving priority to reviving deprived
urban areas and functions and to strengthening the role of the regions’ urban centres as
“development poles”, whereby maintaining the balance and enhancing cohesion
between the economically strongest areas and the rest of the urban structure. This type
of investments are considered a precondition for tackling the high concentration of socio-
economic and environmental problems affecting the urban agglomerations of all
Romanian regions, for creating the infrastructures and services necessary for a better
quality of life and sustainable economic development, but also as an important factor for
promoting social cohesion, employment and social inclusion of vulnerable social groups.
The aim of the regional development strategy of Romania is to address the key
development requirements of the lagging Romanian regions. It takes full account of the
existing needs and their particular socio-economic problems, thus ensuring greater
ownership of the cohesion policy objectives on the ground, in areas where proximity
matters most, such as basic infrastructures, entrepreneurship, innovation and
employment. The proposed interventions are designed as a means to ensure
mobilization of all available resources for targeted, viable investment in areas where
expenditure can have the greatest impact and added value, and as a tool to improve the
production base and structure of the regional economies, with long-lasting effects and
sustainable benefits that extend beyond the period of structural assistance.
***
In addition to the above objectives for supporting the regional development and the
balanced support of Romania’s regions, action is to be undertaken to support the
development of an efficient management system through enhanced institutional building
initiatives. As highlighted in the SF regulations, the establishment of efficient monitoring
of operational programmes able to ensure the quality of their implementation is a key
factor to the implementation of the assistance:
Improvement of the management capacity of the Romanian regions (objective 5) is a

pre-requisite to the establishment of a sustainable model to support the implementation
of the ROP operations. The main goal here is to assist public administration authorities
to meet the need in acquiring the necessary know-how and institutional conditions which
are necessary for the successful management of the ROP. Both material and non-
material assistance to this process should be aimed at the establishment of clear policy
priorities and a strategic framework that would allow the achievement of the following
goals:

> Concentrate resources on the foundation of regional development approaches.
Substantial strengthening of the assistance provided to local actors for creating

partnerships, for implementing the interventions, and for getting access to available
financial support. At a longer term, support them in establishing the framework of their
own strategies. This requires the EC pre-accession support on design, development
and implementation of local approaches. This can be achieved through the integration
of the support to strengthening the capacity of the local level as a horizontal priority of
the Structural Funds assistance, as well as the available pre-accession instruments.
The result of this approach will be to assist local stakeholders to design the concepts for
integrated regional development and socio-economic development policies, support
cooperation among local actors, open access to EU funding, and help to develop the
required management and evaluation instruments.
> Generate integrated regional development approaches.
Strengthen and support the links between economic development, horizontal policy
priorities such as environment, cultural and social development, with a global human
resources development approach, understanding the human capital basis as a lever to
economic growth and the most important factor for the promotion of integrative policy
thinking and acting at the local level.
> Improve the professional capacities for regional development action.
Training and information exchange, coupled with horizontal interventions to support local
actors for the sustainable development of their own professional capacity, at
organization or partnership level.
> Promotion of Structural Funds and other types of assistance through, and towards, an
integrated development strategy approach.
Strengthening the effort to improve the access of stakeholders’ organizations to the

Structural Funds by simplified funding procedures. This requires an improved level of
understanding of the opportunities offered at the regional/sectoral level and a greater
penetration of the awareness of all interested actors. In addition, an integrated approach
in the planning of the interventions is required at sectoral and regional level (and ideally
by blending both), in order to help local actors to use financial resources effectively.
2.2.3 Consistency with Community policies and horizontal objectives

In line with the provisions of the draft Council Regulation of July 2004, the assistance to
be provided under the Romanian ROP is consistent with the activities, policies and

priorities of the Community, as they are presented in the Community Strategic
Guidelines36, and referred in the national strategic reference framework.
The Romanian ROP has been developed with respect of the following priorities:
! Making Europe and its regions a more attractive place to invest and work
! Improving knowledge and innovation for growth
! More and better jobs
! Territorial cohesion and co-operation
The implementation of the programme will reflect these priorities and will contribute to
the achievement of the objectives of the cohesion policy for the period 2007-2013.
Meeting the Community’s growth and jobs challenge is a basic element of the Romanian
ROP strategy. It is seen as the lever that will boost all the resources needed to meet the
wider economic, social and environmental goals and the specific strategies for the
development of the regions. Community principles are reflected in the national strategic
framework of reference on regional development (NDP 2007-2013, priority 6) and in the
ROP.
The Romanian ROP also takes into consideration the requirements for sustainable
development and respect of the equal opportunities principle as they are reflected in the
Communitry horizontal objectives, included in the SF genral regulation, in line with the
renewed Lisbon strategy and the Community gudelines for cohesion.
Sustainable development of the regions is seen as an overarching objective of all ROP

actions, which shall contribute to the achievement of a balanced growth, the increase of
the levels of competitiveness and employment and the protection and quality of the
environment.
Growth strategies are incorporating actions to sustain equality between men and women
with regard to labour market opportunities. They also provide for actions aimed at
promoting equal opportunities for all as the regards the access to employment, with
specific actions, which are expected to have a medium and long-term impact to
combating social and lab our market exclusion. The European Union’s commitment to
equality of opportunity between women and men is fully respected by Romanian
government strategies and it has been incorporated as an horizontal principle both into
the National Development Plan 2007-2013 and to the present ROP document. The
strategy which will be used to improve equal opportunities between men and women in
36
Cohesion Policy in Support of Growth and Jobs. Community Strategic Guidelines, 2007-2013, Non paper
of DGs Regional Policy and Employment, May 2005

the Romanian regions is gender mainstreaming, which involves the consideration of the
impact of policies and programmes on women and men at all stages of policy
development. This mainstreaming of policy will be applied in addition to positive action
operations and use of existing legislation to maximise equality of opportunity for women
and men. This focus on gender equality will have a considerable impact on the full
integration and participation of the women in society, while advancing priorities
incorporated in the Sectoral Operational Programmes and the respective national
strategic framework of reference, namely Human Resources Development, Rural
Development and Competitiveness.
As regards environment, complying with environmental standards is a critical point for

most of development strategies. Most of Romanian companies, including both insustries
and agricultural and farming activities will have to be encouraged to comply with EU
environmental standards. All ROP actions addressed to enhancing enterprises growth
and competitiveness are designed taking into consideration the need to make available
the necessary funds and control mechanisms at the same time, for the achievement of
balanced strategies for regional development, combined with the principles of
environmental protection.
Moreover, the Romanian ROP has sustainable development as a main concern and
incorporates actions which aim at bringing solutions to the principle threats to
sustainable development, as these have been identified by the Community strategic
guidelines for sustainable development37:
! Emissions of greenhouse gases from human activity causing global warming

(with actions included under ROP priorities 2, 3 and 4)
! Antibiotic resistant strains of some diseases, hazardous chemicals in everyday

use (actions included under ROP priorities 2 and 4)
! The effects of poverty and social exclusion on individuals such as ill health,
suicide and structural unemployment (actions included under ROP priorities 1.2 ,
2 and 3)
! Ageing of the population that creates a slowdown in the rate of economic growth
as well as the quality and financial sustainability of pension schemes and public
health care (actions included under ROP priority 1.2)
! Waste volumes persistently growing faster than GDP, leading to soil loss and
declining fertility of the soil (actions included under ROP priorities 2, 3 and 4)
37
Presidency conclusions, European Council, March 2005.
! Transport congestion (actions included under ROP priority 1.1 and 4)
! Regional imbalances in the EU (actions included horizontaly, under all ROP

priorities)
In addition, the Romanin ROP incorporates, under priority 2 actions aiming to support
RDI and applied innovation related to sustainable development, thus constributing to the
overall regional competitiveness.
In the coming years, and in the course of the implementation of the ROP interventions,
Romania is prepared to face the major challenge of harmonizing sustainable
development with economic development goals and allow its economy for the integration
process. Local sustainable development strategies already in place by the Romanian
government, help building a coherent strategy for the furure, which takes into
consideration all overarching Community horizontal priorities and articulate the meand
that will assure attainment of the major development objectives, including human
development and quality of life principles.
2.3 Assessment of the expected impact of the

programme
2.3.1 Ex-ante evaluation of the Programme

The Council Regulation laying down general provisions on the European Regional
Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Cohesion Fund, presented by the
Commission (COM(2004)492 final, 14.7.2004) requires an ex ante evaluation for each
Operational Programme under the Convergence Objective. The ex-ante evaluation of
the ROP has been drawn up on the basis of the current state of the draft Council
Regulation laying down general provisions on the ERDF and the Cohesion Fund and the
Draft Working Paper on Ex Ante Evaluation of July 7th 2005.
The objectives of the ex-ante evaluation are:
• Evaluation of the relevance of the proposed Operational Programme as a mean to

reply to the regions’ needs
• Evaluation of the effectiveness, efficiency and longer term sustainability of the

actions and the dully justified anticipated results of the Programme priorities
• Contribution to the further quantification of the Programme’s targets and the

quantification of the tangible outputs, results and impacts of the ROP and in

establishing proxy indicators and procedures for a close monitoring of intangible
effects.
• Analysis of the sufficiency of the implementation and monitoring mechanisms and

contribution to the design of the selection criteria of the specific actions to be co-
financed under the ROP priorities.
More specifically, the ex-ante evaluation identifies and appraises medium- and long-term
needs, the goals to be achieved, the results expected, the quantified targets, the
coherence, if necessary, of the strategy proposed, the Community value-added, the
extent to which the Community’s priorities have been taken into account, the lessons
drawn from previous programming and the quality of the procedures for implementation,
monitoring, evaluation and financial management.
The present ROP document has been drafted taking into consideration the results and
recommendations of the ex-ante evaluation of the Programme38. According to these, the
following key issues are to be noted:
Coherence and appropriateness of the scope and objectives of the Programme
Effectiveness of the strategies
Results and impact of the interventions
Identification of difficulties in the impelemntation of the Programme
2.3.2 Key performance indicators

From the implementation of the ROP, it is anticipated that 70.000 new job places39 will
be created. A more balanced distribution of the regional GDP is also aimed to be
achieved, and the increase of the attractiveness of the regions, as a result of the
implemetation of the ROP actions and the co-ordination of the ERDF assistance
38
The full text of the ex-ante evaluation is included in Annex 3 of the present document.
39
12-months full time equivalent

received by the various Structural Funds interventions in the Romanian regions, both
from the regional OP (ROP) and by the sectoral ones (SOPs).
At the level of the qualitative evaluation of the programming, it is expected that the
proposed ROP objectives, which are the outcome of the thorough examination of the
comparative advantages and problems of the regions, will creplyover successfully and at
an important degree to the existing needs and limitations of the regions, strengthening at
the same time their comparative advantages.
The considerable degree of cross-correlation between the objectives and the proposed
interventions is expected to create an important degree of accomplishment of the ROP
effectiveness. From the cross-correlation of the regional development objectives, as they
are layed out in the national strategic framework of reference and the objectives with the
ROP priorities, it emerges an important degree of coverage of the objectives from the
proposed actions. In addition, most of the priorities cover more than one objective, as
presented in the table of the paragraph 2.1.2. Besides, the proposed operations are
correlated in a way to achieve a synergies’ result in terms of an integrated development
approach. This multiple coverage of the objectives increases the degree of effectiveness
of the developmental strategy reflected by the Romanian ROP.
The ROP priorities and the forecasted actions are fully harmonised with the EU regional
development strategies and the cohesion policies, as laid aout in the main Community
strategic papers.
The following context indicators will be monitored for the global ROP objectives and
performance targets:
Context
Unit Baseline Baseline Year Source
Indicators
GDP per capita PPS in constant National Institute
7,000 2004
(country level) prices, euro of Statistics (NIS)
NIS/National
Employment rate
% 50.4 2004 Agency for
(national)
Employment
Employment rate
(per region)
Region 1: North–East
Region 2: South–East NIS/National
Region 3: South % Agency for
Region 4: South–West
Region 5: West
Employment
Region 6: North–West
Region 7: Center
Region 8: Bucharest
NIS/National
Unemployment rate
% 7.1 2004 Agency for
(national)
Employment
Unemployment rate National Agency
% 2002
(per region) for Employment

Region 1: North–East 10.8
Region 2: South–East 10.0
Region 3: South 9.2
Region 4: South–West 9.4
Region 5: West 6.6
Region 6: North–West 6.8
Region 7: Center 9.0
Region 8: Bucharest 3.3
Tertiary educated
population (aged 15 % NIS/MER
– 64, national)
Tertiary educated
population in
% 12% 2003 NIS
employment (aged
15 – 64, national)
Structure of
employment per
sector
% 2004 NIS
Agriculture 35.0
Industry 29.0
Services 36.0
Foreign Direct
million euro 10,159.60 2003 NIS/NBR40
Investments (FDI)
Foreign Direct
Investments (FDI per
region)
Region 1: North–East 300.80
Region 2: South–East 1,107.70
Region 3: South million euro 846.10 2003 NIS/NBR
Region 4: South–West 360.50
Region 5: West 751.90
Region 6: North–West 676.90
Region 7: Center 644.60
Region 8: Bucharest 5,471.10
Share of economically
active population in
Participation rate
total population 15+ in
2004 NIS
%
% per capita,
Macro-economic
Additional GDP compared to
models
baseline
Degree of financial
% of EU Funds
implementation
As regards the ROP 2007-2013 strategic onjectives (promoting growth and

strengthening the economy as a whole; enhancing competitiveness and employment, as
set out in the renewed Lisbon strategy, through the creation of a business-friendly
environment capable of attracting investment and strengthening innovation and
entrepreneurship; establishing high quality and safe transport networks and providing
basic infrastructures, and improving the human capital and human resources capacity of
all Romanian regions, thereby also safeguarding the availability of a qualified workforce
and the effective use of the resources available), the following programme level
40
NBR: National Bank of Romania

indicators will be monitored. Programme level indicators include indicators for the
Communitry horizontal objectives (sustainable development and equal opportunities).
Programme level
Unit Baseline 41 Target Source
Indicators
National Institute
GDP per capita Billion lei 2,387,914.0
2004 of Statistics (NIS)
GDP per capita (per GDP per capita (per
region) region)
Region 1: North–East Region 1: 49,709,401
Region 2: South–East Region 2: 59,667,573
2002
Region 3: South lei Region 3: 55,626,987 NIS
Region 4: South–West Region 4: 55,530,625
Region 5: West Region 5: 75,274,146
Region 6: North–West Region 6: 65,381,319
Region 7: Center Region 7: 75,053,889
Region 8: Bucharest Region 8: 1,446,69,683
GDP PPS
per person employed In constant prices
NIS/Evaluation
Increase in the
activity rate in total
and per gender
Region 1: North–East M:00%-F:00%-T:00%
Region 2: South–East M:00%-F:00%-T:00% National Agency
Region 3: South % M:00%-F:00%-T:00% for Employment
Region 4: South–West M:00%-F:00%-T:00%
Region 5: West M:00%-F:00%-T:00%
Region 6: North–West M:00%-F:00%-T:00%
Region 7: Center M:00%-F:00%-T:00%
Region 8: Bucharest M:00%-F:00%-T:00%
Number of net jobs Full-time jobs (12-
created by the month occupation - 50.000 70.000
Programme equivalent)
Increase in the
regional employment
rate in total and per
gender
Region 1: North–East M:00%-F:00%-T:00%
National Agency
Region 2: South–East % M:00%-F:00%-T:00%
Region 3: South M:00%-F:00%-T:00% for Employment
Decrease in the
regional
unemployment rate
in total and per
gender
Region 1: North–East M:00%-F:00%-T:00% National Agency
%
Region 2: South–East M:00%-F:00%-T:00% for Employment
Region 3: South M:00%-F:00%-T:00%
41
2004, or otherwise if stated

Ministry of
Specific emissions of
NOx1 t/km2 Environment
(annual report)
Projects supported with Programme
a direct positive impact % of projects - Monitoring/Evalua
on environment tion reports
Projects supported with Programme
a direct positive impact % of projects - Monitoring/Evalua
on equal opportunities tion reports
Enterprises access to % of total number of
63.5 NIS
the Internet enterprises
More indicators are defined for the measurement of the overall ROP 2007-2013 actions
performance and impact. These are corresponding to the ROP specific objectives and
they include the name of the Indicator, the unit of measurement, the baseline data for
the year 2005 (or otherwise, as stated) and the source of the information required for the
calculation of the value of the indicator:
Objective 1: Improvement of regional and local public infrastructure

Programme level
Unit Baseline Target Source
Indicators
Annual traffic (increase) number of vehicles
Companies settled
close to the number of companies
infrastructure
Decrease of total
accidents per year
% MAI
Decrease of total
deaths at road % MAI
accidents per year
Compliance of
Romanian regions with
Programme
the EU regulations on Number of counties 0 25
transport and Evaluation reports
communications
Response time of civil
protection and
emergency assistance
minutes MAI/MOH
mechanisms
Reduction of the
average of days of % MOH
inpatient treatment
Reduction of the cost of
inpatient treatment
% MOH
Life expectancy
(increase)
years 71.25 NIS
Number of jobs created Full-time jobs (12- Programme
in road construction month occupation - Monitoring/Evalua
projects equivalent) tion reports
Number of jobs created Full-time jobs (12-
in the health/social month occupation - MOH/MLFSS
protection sector equivalent)
Increase of the number
of University graduates % MER/NIS
(as a result of the

increase of the access
to education)
Objective 2: Strengthening of regional and local economies

Programme level
Indicators
Interregional variability Coefficient of variation
of GDP in %
NIS
NIS/National
Interregional variability Coefficient of variation
of unemployment in %
Agency for
Employment
Number of projects Programme
including direct job No of projects - Monitoring/Evalua
creation measures tion reports
Number of projects Programme
including RDI No of projects - Monitoring/Evalua
measures tion reports
Number of new
No of new
businesses created
businesses (per 0 NASMEC/NIS
in the regions (per
region)
region)
Number of
businesses in the
regions
Total (country, 2002): Total (country):
No of businesses 319,816
Region 1: North–East
with 1-249 Region 1: 37,240 Region 1: 0
Region 2: South–East
Region 2: 40,828 Region 2: 0 NASMEC/NIS
Region 3: South employees (per
Region 3: 36,086 Region 3: 0
Region 4: South–West region) Region 4: 26,163 Region 4: 0
Region 5: West
Region 6: North–West
Region 7: Center
Region 8: Bucharest
Number of new
Business Support
Structures42 Total (country): 152 Total (country): 208
Region 1: North–East Region 1: 9 Region 1:
Region 2: South–East No of new business Region 2: 12 Region 2: NASMEC/MAI/M
Region 3: South Region 3: 10 Region 3:
support structures Region 4: 10
ER
Region 4: South–West Region 4:
Region 5: West Region 5: 15 Region 5:
Region 6: North–West Region 6: 12 Region 6:
Region 7: Center Region 7: 22 Region 7:
Region 8: Bucharest Region 8: 62 Region 8:
Objective 3: Development of regional and local tourism

Programme level
Indicators
Foreign exchange Lei NIS
42
Business Support Structures receiving assistance by the ROP are: Industrial Parks, Business Consultancy
Centers, Science and Technology Parks, Business Incubators, Technology and Information Centers.

income from tourism
Annual increase in
the number of
% NIS
incoming tourists
(per region)
Increase in the
number of nightees
% NIS
of locan and foreign
vsitors (per region)
Number of Programme
cultural/tourist sites Number of sites Monitoring/Evalua
rehabilitated tion reports
Increase in the Number of tourist
number of tourist products offered in NIRDT
products the regions
Objective 4: Support for urban development

Programme level
Indicators
Surface of green
spaces per 1000
M2 / 1000 inhabitants
inhabitants in the
urban areas
Surface of
recreation/sport/cultu 2
M / 1000 inhabitants
re areas per 1000
inhabitants
Increase of the
economic
%
diversification in the
urban areas
Dicrease of urban
%
criminality
Reduction of
unemployment in %
urban areas
Reduction of
unemployment rates
of vulnerable social
groups living in urban %
areas (ethnic
minorities, young
people)
Increase in the
number and quality
%
of social services
(elder, children, etc).
Degree of coverage
in the accessibility of
public buildings for %
disabled with mobility
difficulties

Dicrease of traffic in
%
urban areas
Dicrease of pollution
%
in urban areas
Objective 5: Improvement of the management capacity of the Romanian regions

Programme level
Indicators
Public
E-government
number administration/Ev
applications
aluation reports
Municipalities Public
offering modern ICT number administration/Ev
services to citizens aluation reports
Citizens benefiting
Public
from modernised
services on behalf of
% administration/Ev
aluation reports
the local authorities
SF absorption Programme
capacity (in terms of Monitoring
financial % (Annual)/Evaluati
performance) of the on reports
final beneficiaries

3. THE PRIORITIES OF THE ROP
The operation of the general objective and of the specific objectives of the NDP 2007-
2013 regional development strategy regarding the balanced development of all regions,
will be achieved by an integrated approach, based on a combination of public
investments in the local infrastructure, active incentive policies for business activities,
and support of local resources capitalization in the following priority development areas,
or “priorities”:
1. Improvement of local and regional infrastructure
2. Support the development of local and regional economies
3. Development of regional and local tourism
4. Support urban development
5. Technical assistance
1. Improvement of local and regional infrastructure
The implementation of this priority aims at creating appropriate conditions, if not equal,
mainly, regarding the transport infrastructure, the social infrastructure and the access to
the main services, as well exploiting the local development potential by capitalizing the
existing material, human and environmental resources.
By this priority, can be materialized mainly the specific objective regarding the
competitiveness of the regions as business locations, established on the basis of the
need identified in the rationale, i.e. the need to increase the regions’ attractiveness
degree, but can also contribute to achieving the other specific objectives, transport and
social infrastructure, constituting the main conditions for development and for increasing
the regions’ attractiveness degree.
2. Support the development of local and regional economies
By this priority, can be materialized mainly the specific objective regarding the stopping
of the economic decline and fighting against the potential decompression of certain
areas from the economic growth process. This specific objective has been established
on the basis of the need identified in the rationale of the strategy and aims at the
development, on innovative basis, of regional and local economies, by stimulating
innovative businesses.

In Romania, local and regional economies are often poorly innovative and concentrated
territorially. This situation depends on numerous factors of national level, which are
beyond the control of local authorities, but which is generated also by the insufficient
correlation with RDI institutions, active at regional level, with the new needs of local
business communities. Following this state of affairs, local authorities can propose, in
the framework of their regional and local development competences, specific initiatives
aiming at promoting partnerships in RDI, which should be adapted and used for the local
priorities and needs.
3. Development of regional and local tourism
By this priority, will be implemented, mainly, the specific objective “capitalization of

regions’ cultural and tourist potential and increasing the contribution of these sectors in
the regions’ development”, identified in all the Development plans and strategies of all
eight regions.
Tourism represents a real “tool” for economic growth, because it creats job opportunities,
by capitalizing cultural and natural heritage, specific to each of the eight development
regions, including marginal areas, economically and socially disadvantaged areas.
Further more, tourism also creates opportunities for economic diversity at local level, as
a result of capitalizing the revenues obtained at local level.
Capitalizing tourist attractions from different areas of the country can contribute to the
economic growth of some declining urban centres or of some marginal rural areas, by
facilitating the appearance and the development of local firms, transforming areas with
low economic competitiveness into attractive ones for investors.
4. Support urban development
This priority answers the specific objective referring to the need to stop the decline of
urban areas and to create some regional development poles, established on the need
identified on the basis of analysis and described in the strategy rationale.
Many towns have economic growth potential, and some even for becoming regional
development poles, due both to the fact that they can accomplish a multitude of urban
functions – especially by the potential they have for developing the services sector and
to benefit from the dynamics following the appearance of SMEs – and also due to the
fact that they functions of transport node or access gate/way. Yet, there are more
obvious signs of structural underdevelopment of many centres situated in various parts
of the country. Many towns register losses in terms of active population. What is even
more serious is the fact that there is a tendency of emigration of the educated
population.

5. Strengthening the local authorities’ capacity of programming and development
management
Romania’s accession to the EU will impose from 2007 a better knowledge of the
directives, regulations and mechanisms of European decision at all levels of public
administration, including first of all the personnel of local administration.
In Romania, the most important administrative functions are under the responsibility of
the central level and of its territorial bodies. There is a tendency to enhance the local
administrations’ responsibilities in planning and programming, by a large decentralization
process, sustained as much as possible by market mechanisms. So far, this process
underwent a series of stages of the process for creating the required legal framework.
This massive decentralization and reform process who made the responsibilities of local
authorities more numerous, created problems in terms of institutional capacity at local
level, there existing difficulties in accomplishing the tasks related to
planning/programming development and implementation. There were and still are
carried out many training programmes for the personnel in public administration. They
have to be carried on by increasing the personnel’s capacity in the above-mentioned
areas and ensuring very good knowledge of the European decision-making directives,
regulations and mechanisms, at all levels of public administration, including firstly the
personnel of local administration.
***
The above implementation priorities of the ROP are in line with the Community cohesion
policy and the provisions for distribution of the Strucutral Funds assistance, as analysed
in the relevant regulations. They are taking into consideration the global regional
development strategy of the Romanian government, and they are analysed in operations
based on an analysis of :
- the specific needs of the regions
- the administrative capacity of regionally implemented operations at national and

regional level
- the capacity of absorption of the appropriate financial allocations
On the basis of the defined objectives of the ROP and the main strategic directions and
considerations for their achievement, the financial expenditure of the ROP is distributed
according to the following table:
ROP Priorities Distribution of the ROP

financial expenditure
1. Improvement of regional and local public infrastructure 46.89%
2. Strengthening of regional and local economies 18.22%
3. Development of regional and local tourism 8.10%
4. Support for urban development 25.17%
5. Technical Assistance 1.62%
The above percentages (weights) have been established on the basis of the analysis of
the needs of the regions in the specified areas of assistance, and they correspond to the
allocation of the ROP financial resources.
In the following paragraphs is presented an analysis of the contents of the ROP priorities
and the eligible actions included under the various areas of operations.
Paragraph 1 presents contains the description of the ROP priority “Improvement of

regional and local public infrastructure”. It provides an analytical description of the three
sub-priorities/areas of operations, i.e. Improvement and development of transport
networks and related public utilities (1.1), Support of health care, public safety
infrastructure and social services (1.2), and Development and rehabilitation of education
infrastructure (1.3). The analytical presentation of the sub-priorities of the first priority of
the ROP is necessary for the better explanation of the objectives and subsequent areas
of operations, because of the particular needs of each of the three sectors of intervention
(transport, health and education). All sectors are of particular significance for the
Romanian regions, bringing sustainable solutions to the enhancement of the
attractiveness of the regions and the improvement of the quality of life. Priority 1 of the
ROP will be allocated approximately 1,620 million euro of ERDF and national financing
(46.89% of the ROP total expenditure). Sub-priorities 1.1, 1.2 and 1.3 will respectively
receive 000, 000 and 000 million euro for the whole programming period (2007-2013).
Paragraph 2 contains the description of the ROP priority “Strengthening of regional and
local economies”, which is directly connected with the growth of the productive sectors in
the Romanian regions, the promotion of enterpreuneurship and and increase of
enterprise competitiveness. The ROP total financial expenditure allocated to priority 2 is
of approximately 630 million euro (18.22% of the total ERDF and national financing of
the Programme).
Paragraph 3 presents the analytical description of the ROP priority “Development of

regional and local tourism”, within which measures of rehabilitation of the Romanian
touristic areas are promoted (including the renovation of historical and cultural
patrimony, and the protection/rehabilitation of natural heritage), as well as measures

aimed to support business growth activities in the tourism sector (tourist income
generation generation activities). The 3rd ROP priority receives a total allocation of 280
million euro approximately, which corresponds to 8.10% of the total ROP financial
expenditure (including ERDF and national financing).
Paragraph 4 contains the analysis of the ROP priority “Urban development”, which is
more specifically oriented to actions aimed at supporting urban regeneration activities in
the Romanian regions. Activities that will receive support from this priority may be
integrated actions of urban regenration, as well as actions related to the adoption of
environmental friendly transport infrastructure and related public utilitities, or actions
related to the rehabilitation of brownfield areas which exist in the Romanian urban
agglomerations, for the development of new activities. ROP priority 4 will receive a total
financial allocation (including ERDF and national financing) of 870 million euro (i.e.
25.17% of the ROP financial expenditure) for the whole period of the current
programming (2007-2013).
Finaly, paragraph 5 presents the analysis of the actions included under the “Technical
Assistance” priority of the ROP, which will receive 56 million euro approximately for the
2007-2013 programming period, which corresponds to 1.62% of the total financial
expenditure of the ROP (total of ERDF and national financing).
The estimated allocation of the funds distributed per ROP priorities is presented in the
following table (EUR in current prices).
Total public Communitry National
ROP priorities expenditure contribution (ERDF) Contribution
1=2+3 2 3
1. Improvement of regional and 1,620,990.00 1,215,740.00 405,250.00
local public infrastructure
2. Strengthening of regional 630,000.00 472,500.00 157,500.00
and local economies
3. Development of regional and 280,000.00 210,000.00 70,000.00
local tourism
4. Support for urban 870,000.00 652,500.00 217,500.00
development
5. Technical Assistance 56,000.00 414,000.00 14,000.00
Total 3,456,990.00 2,592,740.00 864,250.00
A more specific analysis of the Structure of the ROP as regards the financial allocations
to the various ROP priorities and how these correlate with the ERDF priorities (including
a distribution of the total public expenditure) are included in the tables of the two
following pages.

STRUCTURE OF THE REGIONAL OPERATIONAL PROGRAMME (ROP)
amounts in million euro
% on the Total Community National
Total Public
Public Participation Public
Expenditure
Expenditure (ERDF) Sources
1.1 Improvement and development of transport networks and related public utilities 1,177.000 34.05% 882.75 294.25
1.1.1 Construction and modernization of regional road network 945.000 27.34% 708.75 236.25
1.1.2 Local road infrastructure to eliminate bottlenecks or black spots 96.000 2.78% 72.00 24.00
1.1.3 Intermodal infrastructures 96.000 2.78% 72.00 24.00
Priority 1:
1.1.4 Emergency and Crisis Management Radio Communications System 40.000 2.47% 30.00 10.00
Improvement
of regional 1.2 Support of health care, public safety infrastructure and social services 265.990 7.69% 199.49 66.50
and local 1.2.1 Health care infrastructure 174.530 5.05% 130.90 43.63
public 1.2.2 Public Safety Infrastructure 5.260 0.15% 3.95 1.32
infrastructur
e 1.2.3 Social Services Infrastructure 86.200 2.49% 64.65 21.55
1.3 Development and rehabilitation of education infrastructure 178.000 5.15% 133.50 44.50
1.3.1 Improving Basic Infrastructure of schools especially at rural areas - all levels 152.400 4.41% 114.30 38.10
1.3.2 Improvement of Conditions for Disabled Students 15.600 0.45% 11.70 3.90
1.3.3 Improving the ICT potential of schools/ universities 10.000 0.29% 7.50 2.50
1.3.4 Improvement of VET/CVT Infrastructure 8.000 0.23% 6.00 2.00
Total 1,620.990 46.89% 1,215.74 405.25
2.1 Improvement/setting-up of business and RDI support infrastructure 300.000 8.68% 225.00 75.00
2.1.1 Creation of business and RDI support infrastructure in the Romanian regions 120.000 3.47% 90.00 30.00
Priority 2:
Strengthenin 2.1.2 Improvement of the infrastructure of the entities currently operating as business service providers 180.000 5.21% 135.00 45.00
g of regional 2.2 Support and modernization of local and regional businesses 150.000 4.34% 112.50 37.50
and local 2.3 Support of business and innovation services 180.000 5.21% 135.00 45.00
economies
2.3.1 Support the improvement of services provided by business support structures 90.000 2.60% 67.50 22.50
2.3.2 Provide incentives for the use of business support services 90.000 2.60% 67.50 22.50
Total 630.000 18.22% 472.50 157.50
Priority 3: 3.1 Rehabilitation of touristic areas, renovation of historical and cultural patrimony, protection/rehabilitation of natural
190.000 5.50% 142.50 47.50
Dev. of heritage
regional and
local tourism 3.2 Support of tourist income generation activities 90.000 2.60% 67.50 22.50
Total 280.000 8.10% 210.00 70.00

4.1 Integrated actions of urban regeneration 230.000 6.65% 172.50 57.50
Priority 4: 4.2 Environmental friendly transport infrastructure, related public utilities and urban public services 460.000 13.31% 345.00 115.00
Support for 4.2.1 Investments enhancing urban mobility through the creation of an efficient public transport network in cities/towns 230.000 6.65% 172.50 57.50
urban 4.2.2 Street rehabilitation, replacement of public utilities, especially in historical city centres 110.000 3.18% 82.50 27.50
development
4.2.3 Public urban services 120.000 3.47% 90.00 30.00
4.3 Rehabilitation of in situ brownfield areas for development of new activities 180.000 5.21% 135.00 45.00
Total 870.000 25.17% 652.50 217.50
Priority 5: Technical Assistance 56.000 1.62% 42.00 14.00
TOTAL 3,456.990 100.00% 2,592.74 864.25

TOTAL DISTRIBUTION OF PUBLIC EXPENDITURE PER ERDF SECTORAL PRIORITIES
AND ROP PRIORITIES CONTRIBUTING TO THE TOTAL DISTRIBUTION
Country: ROMANIA
OP: REGIONAL OPERATIONAL PROGRAMME "Regional Development"
Programming Period: 2007-2013
Population: 21,790,000 (2002) amounts in million euro
PRIORITIES
risks)
SMEs
Health
Energy
Society
regional
Tourism
Transport
Education
Information
Direct aid to
Environment
Development
Prevention of
technological
investment in
quality of life)
Research and
Technological
attractiveness
in the regions)
(increasing the
(coontribution to
and quality of life

development and
risks (natural and

1 IMPROVEMENT OF REGIONAL AND LOCAL PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE
1. 1 Improvement and development of transport networks and related public utilities
PRIORITY
1. 2 Support of health care, public safety infrastructure and social services
1. 3 Development and rehabilitation of education infrastructure
2 STRENGTHENING OF REGIONAL AND LOCAL ECONOMIES
2. 1 Improvement/setting-up of business and RDI support infrastructure
2. 2 Support and modernization of local and regional businesses
PRIORITY
2. 3 Support of business and innovation services
3 DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL AND LOCAL TOURISM
Rehabilitation of touristic areas, renovation of historical and cultural patrimony,
3. 1
protection/rehabilitation of natural heritage
PRIORITY
3. 2 Support of tourist income generation activities
4 SUPPORT FOR URBAN DEVELOPMENT
4. 1 Integrated actions of urban regeneration
Environmental friendly transport infrastructure, related public utilities and urban public
4. 2
PRIORITY
services
4. 3 Rehabilitation of in situ brownfield areas for development of new activities
5 TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
5. 1 Support for the implementation and overall management of the ROP
5. 2 Support to the Communication Strategy of the ROP
PRIORITY
5. 3 Studies and Statistics
TOTAL 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

3.1 Priority 1: Improvement of regional and local
public infrastructure
This priority derives from the 1st objective of the regional development priority43 of the
NDP 2007-2013. It concerns three major types pf infrastructure:
! transport networks and related public utilities
! health care, public safety and social services infrastructure
! education infrastructure
3.1.1 Improvement and development of transport

networks and related public utilities
There is an important need to develop the transportation system in Romania in order to
support the increase on demand44 and to accelerate the progress of its economy while
joining the European Union.
As regards to the provision of transport infrastructures and services, the Sectorial
Operational Programme on Transport has drawn up to increase accessibility, ensure
intermodality, improve the quality and efficiency of services and guaranty theirs
sustainable development.
Provided that roads are the straightforward mode of transport to achieve accessibility for
people and cargo, decisions were taken to allocate large financial resources for the
improvement and enlargement of the national road network. Meanwhile, the efforts at
the rail sector focused on the separation of the infrastructure creation and management
functions from the provision of services. Rail has maintained relatively high market
shares: 40 percent for freight and 54-55 percent for passenger transport measured as
share of ton-km and passenger-km but there is a need both to achieve better
maintenance of the tracks and to become more competitive and costumer oriented.
Airports and ports are also being reorganized to become more independent and self-
governing public bodies to better run their infrastructures and handle the traffic
forecast45.
The transport infrastructure has been identified as an important priority within the
Regional Operational Programme (ROP). Nevertheless, as ensuring accessibility of
people and goods is the main goal attributed to the SOP, it is not the mission of this
ROP sub-priority at all. Even more, it is assumed that accessibility does not only mean
the building up of national transport networks but to really provide access of all the
territory to those networks. As a consequence of that there wouldn’t be local (judetean or
communal) roads in the ROP but as an exception or as a complementary or subsidiary
43
NDP 2007-2013, Priority 6: “Supporting the balanced development of all Romania’s regions”
44
Imports rose from 11.5 million tons in 2000 to 20.8 million tons in 2004 and exports increased from 10.5
million tons in 2000 to 15.6 million tons in 2004, at the most important port in Romania.
45
At the Port of Constanza, the container traffic in 2005 is forecast at 600.000 TEU, six times the container
traffic in 2000. The total traffic handled accounts for 50,4 millions of tons in 2004, 17 % increase over 2003.

bases. Those circumstances or conditions to be met to become eligible are specified in
the area of intervention.
Nevertheless the question of how complementary national and local networks are, still
needs to be discussed among the stakeholders and further analysis and debates are to
be hold in the near future. Since many years ago, judetean and communal roads were
financed by the State Budget at a 66,66 % but recently, the Law 508, which approved
the budget for 2005 and set up the local incomes derived from the share in the VAT and
other taxes, changed the local road finance system.
By the contrary, the mission of priority 1.1 within the ROP is defined as to provide for the
necessary transport infrastructures to the others priorities and areas of intervention. This
is the case for sections of roads, which access to local industrial areas or to sites of
tourism interest.
As Romanian territory is crossed by three pan European corridors, transport sector
would become a relevant driver to regional development. This is also the case for
projects that take advantage of intermodal opportunities building up logistic areas to
create new jobs and contribute to urban regeneration.
Additionally, priority 1.1 would complement the SOP “Transport Infrastructure” by
supporting transport infrastructure projects that are considered critical by local decision
makers because they solve particular problems related to congestion or safety
associated with the traffic crossing cities or towns.
Objectives of the priority 1.1

• To supplement, and create links with, the TEN-T and international and/or national
transport network, and thereby complement the development and modernization of
infrastructure networks planned under the Sectoral Operational Programme
“Transport Infrastructure”, thus supporting the regions’ competitiveness and serving
the achievement of the goals and overall implementation of the NDP 2007-2013.
• To improve transport links and communication between the main regional centers
and between these regional centers and the towns and other areas, in order to
enhance balanced economic development, and to facilitate the population’s mobility
and access to employment, health care, education, culture and recreation.
• To improve the public transport systems and mobility in the Romanian cities and
urban agglomerations.
More specifically, the proposed actions include the following areas of operations:
1.1.1 Construction and modernization of regional and local road network:
The liberate of the economy in Romania and the access to the Western countries
markets derives in a steady growth of transport demand and, as a consequence of it, in
the need for a better transport infrastructure. The effort being made for the
modernization of the road network is remarkable and a new strategy has been set up to
build new sections of highways, to rebuild some national roads as to boost its capacity
and improve its quality to allow the load per axle permitted in the European roads, and
finally to rehabilitate the rest of the national road network by a clear identification of the
sections prioritization.

Nevertheless, the regional road network must also be modernized to guarantee the
accessibility of people and cargo to the mentioned national roads. Otherwise the
timesaving and reliability of this transport mode will not be achieved for the Country and
regional development will not be possible and the national growth won’t be sustainable.
Additionally, the future new transport infrastructure would make it possible to generate
new road transport demand in specific itineraries of the regional network because of its
relevant interest for tourism or other economic activities as to significant industrial
centers or poles or other public transport facilities.
For all these mentioned reasons, projects expected within this area of intervention
include the rehabilitation and modernization of the roads managed by the Counties and
Communes authorities. The road access to the national network from sites of special
interest for the regional, counties and local authorities are also included in this
objective46. Eventually, sections linking intermodal infrastructure of national interest with
the national network could also be considered when priority is not given in the Sectoral
Operational Program provided the regional significance is justified47.
1.1.2 Local road infrastructure to eliminate bottlenecks or black spots due to the
traffic through the cities/towns, either because of the high volume of vehicles or
the heavy cargo using the streets
National and regional roads networks are being rebuild and upgraded due to the
exploding of the motorized index, for both persons and freight traffic, since 1990 in
Romania. Cities and towns have grown rapidly in recent years and most of them have
already approved their Master Plan (PUG) where main urban roads are defined. But the
interface of those networks has frequently created specific bottlenecks, which should be
avoided. Highways/expressways and railways also impose restrictions to the
enlargement of cities and towns when non ad-hoc local road infrastructures are
provided.
Projects expected within this area of intervention include the correspondent civil works
and engineering structures, which encompasses: ring roads and by passes, either
complete or sections; roundabouts, bifurcations and intersections; overpasses and
underpasses of the railways; etc.
1.1.3 Rehabilitation and/or modernization of local/regional airports and of ports
infrastructure (not covered within SOP Transport) in order to satisfy the
operational needs of passengers and cargo transport in view of supporting the
development services and sectors of justified regional interest
Provided that transportation system in Romania is at first phase of evolution, there are
no many projects expected to be promoted in the 2007-2013 programming period. But
some have been identified as being mature enough to be implemented when financial
resources were assured.
Projects expected within this area of intervention include:
46 The modernization of the 13 km long access of the Dobrovat Monastery to the national network is one
example of the cases described and the 18 km long access to the archaeological site of Cucuteni is another
example.
47 The access to the Iasi Airport, linking this national inter modal infrastructure with the national road (DN
28) is a good example of the type of projects described.

- The rehabilitation and/or upgrading of local/regional airports to meet operational
transportation and cargo needs to help services and development sectors of
justified regional interests
- Construction of inland port terminals, both container terminal and roll on, roll off
facilities for promote the use of containers in the logistic chain and the shift of
cargo from the road to inland navigation transport; passenger facilities along
Danube river that would also promote tourism by providing adequate embarking
and disembarking facilities to the cruise traffic.
1.1.4 Emergency and Crisis Management Radio Communications System
The aim of the implementation of the suggested system is to bring management
capabilities to dealing with emergency and crisis situations through secure and reliable
communications to the various groups of end-users (public sector, services, business,
etc). Direct impact of this system is on human life and natural disaster handling. The
suggested system will also function as leverage for the development of the regions,
because of the side applications in the business sector (i.e. intelligent transportation
systems).
The anticipated benefits of the use of the system may be summarized as follows:
- Use of common communications infrastructure for all the users, aiming at
reducing the cost of the service (system sustainability)
- Immediate and low cost radio-communications service to any public or private
sector organization needs to make use of the service
- Secure radio-communications
- Improvement of the voice quality system, which makes communication user
friendly, efficient and effective
- Control of the antennas’ installation, taking into consideration environmental
protection rules
- Voice and data transfer through a technologically advanced network
The related operations include deploying, or using existing infrastructure and services for
managing emergencies (i.e. medical, transport of injured population), crisis management
i.e. civil protection), intelligent transport systems (i.e. municipality and county level car
fleet management). The coverage area consists of the eight economic regions in
Romania, yet, it could commence with a pilot deployment in three regions (or selected
counties), each with particular characteristics, that is urban, mountainous, mixed urban
and mountainous, or other suggested by Civil Protection Authorities. The suggested
system will be using current radio technologies, and will be able to support applications
in rescue management, automobile surveillance; real time data transfer for security
issues (against crime, terrorism, etc).
Specific targets
Interim target Final Target
Indicator Baseline48
(2010) (2013)
48
2005 if not stated otherwise

Implementation
Length of roads
reconstructed (km)
Length of roads
rehabilitated (km)
Ring-roads, complete
or sections
Road by-passes,
complete or sections
Roundabouts,
bifurcations and
intersections
Overpasses and
underpasses of the
railways
Reconstruction or
renewal of rail stations,
port and airport facilities
Construction of new
intermodal facilities
at logistic centers, rail
stations, ports or
airports
Paved area for handing
cargo
Built surface for
passenger transit
Terminals with GPS 0 70 110
capabilities (per region)
Radio Communications 0 1 3
System Management
Centers (per region)
Results
Increase of accesibility
to national road
network (%)
Total time savings per
year by road users
(hours)
Specific sites (p.e.
Industrial parks,
historical places, ...)
with adequate road
access
Decrease of total road
accidents per year (%)
Decrease of total
injured at road
Decrease of total

deaths at road
Total time savings per
year by road users
(hours)
Decrease of total
Decrease of total
injured at road
Decrease of total
deaths at road
Cargo handling
commpanies setled at
Operators or transport
companies using
Other companies
providing services at
Area of coverage of the
regions by the radio
60%
communications
system 0%
Impact
People employed in
road construction
(number of jobs)
People employed
managing and
maintaining the road
(number of jobs)
Annual traffic (number
of vehicles)
Annual heavy traffic
(number of vehicles)
Companies settled
close to the
infrastructure (number
of companies)
People employed in
road construction
People employed
managing and
maintaining the road
(number of jobs

Public Expenditure
On the basis of the basic distribution and the operations included in it, ROP priority 1.1
will receive 1,177 million euro, i.e. 34.05% of the total public expenditure of the ROP
2007-2013.
3.1.2 Support of health care, public safety infras-

tructure and social services
Strengthening member states’ competitiveness and productivity requires the
improvement of the health status standards of the population. According to the
Community strategic guidelines for the period 2007-2013, “investments in health
promotion and disease prevention will help to maintain and prolong participation in the
economy for as many people as possible, thus maintaining their economic contribution
and reducing dependency levels”. Integrated strategies for cohesion also acknowledge
the need to decrease disparities in the quality of, and access to, health care services in
the regions. Actions to support the improvement of long-term care facilities and
investments in systems to improve overall health status, lab our force participation and a
healthy ageing for all citizens constitute an essential part in the achievement of the
regional development objectives.
In Romania, various social and economic factors contributed to the deterioration of the
health status of Romania’s population after 1990, whether directly or indirectly, affecting
factors that impact on health. The socioeconomic factors with a particular impact on
health are: poverty and unemployment, the household expenditure pattern, social
exclusion.
In the wake of the political shake-up of December 1989, the health system was subject
to major changes, with reforms being mainly aimed at:
! Putting a new legal and organizational framework in place
! Introducing a social health insurance scheme
! Paying medical services based on effectiveness and quality
! Giving the population better access to health services
! Shifting the focus of health care to outpatient services
! Improving the quality of medical services

! Decentralizing the health system by giving local authorities, professional
associations, financing institutions, communities a greater role therein.
Frequent changes of government and ministers, lack of clear justified strategies and
well-defined objectives and their pursuit regardless of political changes has slowed down
the pace of post-1990 health sector reforms.
It was only in 1998 that Romania enacted a social health insurance system, which
changed the roles of the main players in the system. The Ministry of Health no longer
has direct control over the financing of a good part of its service suppliers network, as it
is primarily an institution with responsibility to: develop and coordinate health policies,
develop and manage health programs, regulate the health sector – both public and
private. The Ministry of Health has 42 deconcentrated administrative units – county
public health directorates – placed under the double authority of the MoH and county
prefect.
However, the legal changes of roles and responsibilities have yet to be fully correlated
with significant changes of skills and competences. The National Health Insurance
House (NHIH) that had taken over the function of funding health care system benefits
also from a network of 42 branches at county level. Since 1998, the NHIH has acted
more as a passive reimburser than as a proactive services purchaser with no focus on
population health gain.
A new strategy for health services has been approved in June 2004. In addition, a
number of legislative amendments have been passed and new regulations issued in the
areas of Health insurance; Health professions; Ownership and accountability of health
care units; Organization and accreditation of hospitals and organization of physicians’
offices and ambulatory care departments of hospitals, and public-private partnerships for
improvement of health services quality and efficiency; Development of case-based,
diagnosis related group (DRG)-type payment mechanisms for hospitals; Leasing
premises of publicly owned medical offices to physicians.
The Ministry of Health is the central authority in public health, responsible for setting
organization and functioning standards for public health institutions, developing and
financing national public health programs, data collection, empowering public health
officials and drawing up reports on the population's health status.
The Institute for Maternal and Child Care (IMCC) advises the Ministry on standards for
maternal and child health and takes part in health programs. As well as compiling
epidemiological data and setting standards, it is involved in the National Program of
Family Planning, in training obstetricians, in supervising midwifery training and during

the last couple of years in piloting for the reintroduction of community nursing/ health
visiting. The National Advisory Board for Epidemiology and the National Advisory Board
for Health Care Management and Public Health are created within the Ministry of Health.
Primary health care
Until 1999, primary health care was mainly performed through a countrywide network of
about 6000 dispensaries. The dispensaries belonged to the Ministry of Health and
Family and were administered through the local hospital, which also held territorial funds
for both primary and secondary health care. Community-based clinics provided health
care for children under the age of five, housewives, pensioners and the unemployed
living within a specific area. There were also enterprise-based clinics for employees
(sometimes for a number of adjacent enterprises) and school clinics providing medical
care for anyone in full-time education. Patients were not allowed to choose their
dispensary, but were assigned one according to their place of employment or residence.
Starting from 1998, patients were allowed to choose their family doctor; a weighted
percapita formula compounded with a fee for services mechanism that had been
designed and piloted starting with 1994 in 8 counties as a performance related pay of
the family doctor was applied to the whole country. The Health Insurance Law stipulates
that a family doctor may be changed after a minimum of three months after initial
registration with that doctor.
According to new legislation related to the implementation of the health insurance

system, general practitioners moved from being state employees to independent
practitioners, contracted by the (public) health insurance funds, but operating their
medical offices privately. (it is a private non profit status: they are constrained by their
contracts on the type of expenditure that is allowed; their income is controlled by the
NHIH which establishes the value of the points; a provision of the contract aiming to
ensure adequate quality of care to the beneficiaries there is a financial disincentive to
have more then 2000 patients – the value of the points are decreased for doctors having
more then 2000 patients)
Since 1990, there have also been private medical offices staffed by general practitioners
or specialists. The physicians who work in these generally divide their time between the
public and private sectors.
Access to outpatient clinic and hospital specialty services now officially requires a
referral by the family practitioner, but since 1989, the referral system has increasingly
been bypassed and the frequency of primary health care consultation has declined.
Inpatient care

There are four main categories of hospitals in Romania:
! Rural hospitals, which have a minimum of 120 beds and provide internal
medicine and pediatric services.
! Town and municipal hospitals, with at least 250 and 400 beds, respectively,
and departments of internal medicine, surgery, gynecology-obstetrics and
pediatrics.
! District hospitals in larger have, in addition, departments for orthopedics,

intensive care, ophthalmology and otorhinolaryngology.
! Specialized units for tertiary care such as the Institute for Mather and Child,
the Institute of Oncology, The Neurosurgery Hospital, the Institute of
Balneophysiotherapy and Recovery, the Institute of Pneumophysiology and a
number of cardiovascular and other surgery departments in teaching hospitals.
In terms of ownership, except for few small hospitals, all hospitals are publicly owned
and are under state administration. A council board and a general director who holds
executive power lead them. This appointment is made by the relevant district public
health directorate and is usually held by a physician. There are two deputy directors, a
physician and an economist. The council board is appointed by the general director and
usually includes representatives of the different departments within the hospital: health
care, nursing, pharmacy, administration and accounts.
According to the NIS 2002, the total number of hospitals that currently functioning in
Romania (all the ministries, Romanian Academy and DPHD including Bucureşti) are:
! 442 hospitals with 162,588 beds; the rate of beds to 1000 inhabitants is 7.5
! 74 health centers with 1,858 beds and
! 9 tuberculosis sanatoria with 2,202 beds recorded in 2003, meaning 6.6 beds per
1000 patients.
The majority of the operating health Units in 2002 was state owned which represents a
significant factor in terms of national investment to maintain and operate properly the
extent number of health facilities at yearly base.
Human Resourses in the health system
In comparison with the European developed countries, but also with the new EU
member states, Romania presents a lower coverage of the population with physicians,
dentist physicians, pharmacists, nurses and midwives.

Insuring the rural population with physicians (58.2 physicians to 100,000 inhabitants) is
nearly 5 times lower than the average rate for insuring the urban population with
physicians (301.4 o/oooo), the less covered rural areas with physicians are the North
and East regions. The territorial distribution of the medical personnel is heterogeneous;
the insurance with physicians is lower than the country average in the South region
(Ialomiţa – 1,048 inhabitants / 1physitian, Călăraşi - 939 inhabitants / 1 physician) and
better than the country average in the West and Nord-west of the country (Cluj 234
inhabitants / 1 physician, Bihor 382 inhabitants / physician). The same varied distribution
is shown up also in the case of the nurses and the midwives.
The critical problems of the Romanian health system in the mater of personnel are the
following:
! Insufficient number of specialist personnel (especially for the sectors of

prevention, medico-social, public health and management of the health care),
! Asymmetrical territorial distribution of the medical personnel,
! Inadequate share of the auxiliary personnel, overstaffing medical personnel in

the urban areas and in the hospitals.
! Other problems refer to the lack of incentives for choosing the medical career
and sustaining the young specialists, the poor organization of the continuous
training and post- graduate education for the physicians, the low level of the
salaries, etc.
Financing Romanian Health Sector
Over the last years, Romania has seen a substantial change in the way its health-care
sector is financed, namely, a shift towards the funding of health-care by means of an
insurance system. The introduction of health insurance increased the amount of public
funding available for that sector. Yet despite this positive development in terms of
revenue, at least half the users of the health services report making additional out-of-
pocket payments. Moreover, although the budget has benefited from a surplus of
revenue from the health sector, the quality of service is increasingly viewed as
inadequate, and the system's performance is poor in terms of equal access.
Public funding for health-care, a trend that compares favorably to other social services,
should be interpreted against a history of tight control on sector expenditure and inputs
until 1998. At 3.8% of GDP (1999), public expenditure on health in Romania remains
among the lowest in the ECA region: the only countries with a lower share are those
where tax collection has virtually collapsed. However, in 2002 or 2003, the financial
system is recentralized; the National Institute of Health (NIH) becomes subordinated to

the MoH (the president of the NIH being Secretary of State in the MoH) and the MoPF
begins to cut access to important portions from the insurance collected funds. (I do not
have the data now- let me inquire!)
Resolving the imbalance created by the improvement in the funding of health-care

following recent reforms, and the inefficient use of resources – as indicated by the
persistent low marks for services and the anecdotal evidence of large, private out-of-
pocket payments – is becoming an increasingly important part of reforming social
service provision more generally. If the health sector can be made to respond to health-
care needs more effectively and equitably after the introduction of an insurance system
designed to enhance revenue performance, then lessons may emerge for other parts of
the social service delivery systems. If, on the other hand, the rationalization of the
financing side corresponds to a continued deterioration, and not to improvements, in the
allocation of spending, the main benefits of the reform are in doubt.
The state budget was the only public source of health-care funding until 1991. The
Ministry of Health, as well as other ministries with their own health service provider
networks (e.g., Defense, Interior, and Transport) administered these funds. In the early
1990s the move towards diversifying the sources of funding gained support within
Romania as a way of spreading the burden of allocating resources for the health sector.
As part of this trend, the Government introduced partial reimbursement of prescription
drugs for outpatient care in 1992. The move was accompanied by the establishment of
the Special Health Fund, also administered by the Ministry of Health and Family and
based mainly on a two percent payroll tax, but also including revenues from small taxes
on tobacco and alcohol sales, and advertising. In 1993, responsibility for funding
material expenditure other than for drugs, as well as utilities and current maintenance,
was transferred from the state to local budgets.
The adoption of the Law on Social Health Insurance in 1998 initiated the transformation
of the Romanian health-care system from a Semashko state-financed model to an
insurance-based system. Since the law came into force in 1998, earmarked payroll
contributions have become the main source of health sector revenue. Key provisions of
the law regulate health sector revenue generation and redistribution, as well as the
allocation of funds. The 1998 law made insurance membership mandatory and linked it
with employment. Contributions depend on income and are paid in even shares by the
insured and the employer. Children and young people, disabled persons, and war
veterans as well as dependents without income have free access to health insurance.
However, due to low funds for social assistance, poor people find difficulties in
registering for a social benefit; this makes them ineligible to this health insurance. More
than that, there are still illiterate Roma populations without ID documents and hence are
not registered in any of the official records. Poor records and underestimated numbers of
unemployed are another cause of no access to health insurance. For conscripted
soldiers and people serving prison sentences, insurance contributions are paid from the
budgets of the Ministry of Defense and Ministry of Justice.
Health insurance covers ambulatory, inpatient, and dental care, including clinical
preventive services and drugs. A framework contract, agreed upon annually by the
National Health Insurance Fund (NHIF) and the College of Physicians and approved by
the Cabinet, defines the benefits package, conditions for service delivery, and payment
mechanisms. Co-payments are required for drugs and allowed for other services. Family
physicians play a gatekeeper role.
The framework contract sets the terms for health-care services using a variety of
parameters. This contract is the basis of the contracts between the District Health
Insurance Funds (DHIFs) and health-care providers (hospital and their outpatient units,
diagnosis and treatment centers, health centers, basic clinics, and medical offices).
The most important features of the health insurance contract are as follows:
! Insurance benefits include medical services from the first day of sickness or the
date of accident until the patient is fully recovered.
! Medical services include preventive health-care services, ambulatory health-

care, hospital care, dentistry services, medical emergency services,
complementary medical rehabilitation services, pre-, intra-and post-birth medical
assistance, home-care nursing, drugs, health-care materials, and orthopedic
devices.
! The insured are entitled to choose a family doctor for primary health-care
services and, once referred by the family doctor, can have the choice of a
specialist ambulatory care provider. Inpatient care includes full or partial
hospitalization with medical examination and investigations, diagnosis, medical
and/or surgical treatment, nursing, drugs, and health-care supplies,
accommodation, and food.
! Health insurance covers 40 to 60 percent of the cost of dental care, taking into
account previous use of prophylactic dental check-ups. In accordance with the
framework insurance contract, these treatments are fully covered for children
aged less than 16.
! The Ministry of Health and Family and the NHIF, using recommendations from
the College of Physicians and the College of Pharmacists, compile a list of
prescription drugs on a yearly basis with reference prices. Pharmacists must sell

the cheapest available drug, if only the generic name is on the prescription, and
must mention potential substitutes.
! The insured are entitled to prescription drugs; health-care materials needed to

correct eyesight and hearing, and prostheses of the limbs are also either partially
reimbursed by the insurance funds or free.
! Coverage of medical rehabilitation, home-care and transportation related to

medical treatment and housekeeping support during illness or disability are also
regulated by the framework insurance contract.
Health insurance does not cover professional risks and diseases, certain high-tech
health-care services, various dentistry services, curative health-care assistance in the
workplace, and luxury accommodation services in hospital, all of which must be paid for
directly by the patients or from other sources (employer, professional risk insurance, and
private insurance).
Health expenditure from public sources in Romania between 1990-1999 varied between
2.8 and 3.8 percent of GDP, equivalent to $28-58 per capita.
Out-of-pocket Payments
Based on data from the Integrated Household Survey of the National Commission for
Statistics, private spending on health-care in 1996 was estimated at 1,306 billion Lei
($432 million) or about 29 percent of total health expenditures.
An important part of this sum goes directly or indirectly to public providers or their staff
through charges for services and/or under-the-table payments (illegal payments to
providers for services that are nominally free). This level of out-of-pocket payments is
higher than the average level of private expenditure in the OECD countries, but lower
than in countries such as Australia and the United States. Compared to other ECA
countries, Romania seems to be in the middle group where out-of-pocket payments and
the frequency or level of informal payments are concerned.
The Mental Health Service System
The basic Law No. 487/2002 on mental health and protection of persons with mental
disorders regulates promotion of mental health and prevention of mental conditions,
mental health assessment (including diagnostic procedures), protection of the mentally
ill, and organization, operation and finance of the mental health care services.
Care for the persons suffering from mental disorders is provided mainly in psychiatric
hospitals and the psychiatric wards of general hospitals, with the total number of beds
put at 16,895 in 2001 (76.1 beds per 100,000, or 11% of total hospital beds in Romania).

Many psychiatric hospitals are large (800-1200 beds), overcrowded and provide
substandard accommodation and care. Generally, there is a shortage of rehabilitation
facilities and of those pursuing reintegration into society: ergotherapy and occupational
therapy, melotherapy, mental therapy, applied art workshops, information units,
protected workshops, etc. However, there are hospitals where good management and its
fund-raising skills plus involvement in international projects have resulted in better care
and conditions, consistent with modern therapy protocols.
Mental health laboratories provide outpatient services and it is estimated that only 10%
of the operations of these institutions are related to the community care concept. Some
of these laboratories have a trained psychologist and skilled nurses among their staff.
Very few employ social workers and occupational therapists. Most mental health
laboratories provide outpatient counseling only, as they lack a multi-skill service provider
team. Outpatient services are delivered also by the mental health practices operating in
the former policlinics-turned-specialist outpatient services - either as part of the hospital
or as independent units. A number of nongovernmental organizations have developed
models of mental care in the community: day centers, protected apartments,
occupational therapy centers do function in a number of towns in Romania led by Estuar
Foundation, Alzheimer Foundation, etc.
The overall objective is to increase in quality and quantity the provided services to health
care; social care and public safety for Romanian people especially those in more
disadvantaged regions.
Under this area of operations a number of investments is foreseen in modernization of

premises, equipment and development of primary health care centers and hospitals
(incl. emergency medical services), thereby increasing both the capacity and the quality
of health care, in order to provide the physical assets for supporting a modern, function-
based health service delivery system in Romania. Moreover, investments to support
local communities to deal with existing social issues that need special infrastructure and
equipment are foreseen as well.
Operational Objectives
The interventions aiming at improving the quality of medical care and to upgrading the
services to the public are directly related to the re-organization of the health sector,
including both the provision of services and the improvement of the administration

through the establishment of administration and monitoring mechanisms and the
creation of relevant operational frameworks. They include:
! Improve Primary Health Care system and services focusing on rural areas
! Increase the response capacity and quality of the emergency care system and
public pre-hospital emergency medical and technical response system;
! Improve the efficiency of the hospital care system according to the designated
level of care (i.e. regional, county, local); support rationalization and
modernization of the hospital infrastructure and equipment as appropriate to
each level of service
! Support the de-institutionalization of the mental health care system;
! Expansion of the Integrated Health and Social Management Information System
The above investments will be undertaken in the presence of a carefully phased

approach, and in the context of a national health care strategy or regional/county
development strategies - and possibly also depending on the availability of additional
national/county level funding, dedicated to covering the operational and maintenance
costs of the new investments.
For achieving the above-mentioned targets, priority 1.2 includes three distinct areas of
operations as well as a number of different fields of intervention that will be applied
during the implementation period 2007-2013.
More specifically, the actions proposed under priority 1.2, include:
1.2.1. Health care infrastructure
Most health care buildings presently require reconstruction prompted by current

operation requirements, medical standards and current sanitary standards and
regulations -modernization, increasing standards, and certification of workplaces. At
present, the building structures require increased maintenance costs which depend on
the building age and technical condition. The condition is individual for each building and
depends on the volume of investments into maintenance.
The healthcare facilities need to cope with the operation issues as a result of obsolete
equipment available – boiler rooms, washing rooms, kitchens and other technical
equipment which is more than 25 years old in most of the cases. This equipment
requires increased maintenance costs. The most suitable solution would be the
replacement of the entire equipment sets. Also, the operating expenses are excessive
due to poor energy management, which requires investments into thermal insulation of
buildings, etc.
For the above mentioned reasons as well as a number of other relevant factors the
operation 1.2.1. “Health care infrastructure” is focused on reconstruction, refurbishment,
and creation of new buildings to healthcare, thereby increasing the standard of the
healthcare facilities and their obsolete equipment, increase the capacity and efficiency of
services by reinforcing the system and to enter health care in Romania to the information
society era.
Special attention should be given to the horizontal issue of supporting Roma population
by suggesting interventions to areas that Roma population is located.
1.2.1.a. Improvement of Existing Health infrastructure
At present Romanian health care system is provided through almost 428 hospitals at
located at regional and local level. Hospitals represent large, relatively fixed assets in a
rapidly changing environment. The place of hospitals in the health care system has not
fundamentally altered over the last decade, and they continue to concentrate human,
technical and physical capital. However, the current planning emphasis is upon
designing structures and systems flexible enough to adapt to changing demands and
rising public expectations mostly at regional and decentralized level.
The physical conditions of many health facilities in Romania are poor and deteriorating
as a result of low levels of maintenance and a lack of capital investment in recent years.
The urgency of reconstruction and modernisation is individual for each healthcare facility
and is based on several factors, such as the extent of provided medical services, their
provision within the structure of healthcare network and perspective of their future use.
Under the specific intervention category the following are an indicative list of operational
fields:
o Interior Renovation
It includes all necessary works to improve living and working conditions in hospitals
e.g. Paints, Reparation of walls, plasters of buildings, etc.
o Exterior Renovation
It includes all necessary works to renovate the hospital infrastructure; especially

those that are old and have not been rehabilitated the recent years. Examples of
projects: Paints, Reparation of walls, plasters of buildings, Hospital entrance and
surroundings. etc
o Earthquake prevention actions
The majority of the buildings are vulnerable to major earthquake. Special

reinforcement works should be done to a number of large hospitals
o Modernisation of the utilities and ancillary services
The majority of medical or accommodation facilities are obsolete and need to be

improved e.g. purchase of furniture, clinical utilities, air-conditioning, etc.
o Energy saving investments and environmental protection
Under this field of intervention Hospitals shall reduce their spending on energy by
adapting cheaper and more environmental friendly energy sources e.g. upgrading
of the central heating system (conversion of the energy source to gas where
feasible), hospital incinerators, etc
o Medical Equipment of high technology
This field of intervention includes the substitution of old medical equipment by new
of high technology. It is important to notice that any kind of individual Medical
Equipment project which will be funded by this intervention should have carried out
an analytical feasibility study for the use and population coverage of the proposed
equipment as well as the subsequent need to infrastructure in order to base the
equipment effectively.
o Upgrading the alimentary facilities in Hospitals
It is a common factor in most hospitals that the alimentary sector is one of major
importance and needs to be furthermore improved in order to meet the public
health standards.
Potential final beneficiaries of the above mentioned indicative list of investments are
Hospitals, Diagnostic Centres, Primary Health Care Units, other health care facilities.
1.2.1.b. Establishment of new health care Units
The objective of this intervention field is to create new health care infrastructure or/and
create additional infrastructure in existing units, in order to improve the provided health
care services at regions with proven infrastructure need. In addition the field of
intervention will provide funds in order to establish specialized hospitals covering a
larger area of population with specific health demands. Under the last palliative hospitals
is an example of investment.
fields:
o Building the main infrastructure
o Purchase medical equipment
o Purchase accommodation facilities and ancillary utilities

Investment proposal should be accompanied with detailed feasibility and other technical
studies so as to prove necessity and cost benefit effect.
Potential final beneficiaries of the above mentioned indicative list of investments are
Hospitals or/and the District Health Authorities.
1.2.1.c Improvement of health care services
The main objective under this specific field of intervention if to reinforce health care
Services at all levels and especially at rural areas. This field of intervention covers all
necessary investments for primary health care units as well as to improve the efficiency
of the hospital care system according to the designated level of care (i.e. regional,
county, local).
Support of the reform of the primary health care
Access to PHC services in rural and remote areas, as well as the need to provide 24-
hour emergency coverage in these areas is of particular concern to the MOH. Financing
of primary health care has been transformed significantly since 1998, as responsibility
for funding health has shifted from the state budget to the health insurance system.
However, high levels of inefficiency in the allocation and use of services characterize
Romania’s system. Like other transition countries, health care in Romania was overly
focused on specialized, tertiary care, at the expense of primary health services.
Dispensaries and other primary health units are owned by different institutions and, in
some cases, property ownership has not been clear. Some of the dispensaries are
owned by the Ministry of Health and others by judets and local councils. The Ministry
has recently completed an inventory of the ownership of facilities.
Potential final beneficiaries for that intervention category could be the Ministry of Health,
Hospitals and the District Health authorities.
Improvement of the efficiency of the hospital care system according to the designated
level of care (i.e. Regional, county, local)
Romania has 41 counties, each with a county hospital. In each county there is a number
of municipal and local hospitals depending on the surface of the county and the number
of cities and towns in that county. County hospitals vary significantly from the point of
view of their capacity to deal with different types and levels of cases especially when it
comes to critical emergency cases including multitrauma patients and burns patients.
The variation between hospitals is mainly due to the lack of human resources to cover
the needs all over the country as well as because of lack of certain material resources
such as high performance equipment. A number of the county hospitals are also
university centers with adequate human resources and advanced level of care in certain

domains. Actually, patients are being transferred from lower level hospitals to higher-
level hospitals for delivery of adequate treatment.
The future strategy is to classify the hospitals according to their level of care into 4
levels. The most advanced level would be a level I centres that can deal with most
complex cases and the lowest level would be a level 4 centres that should be able to
deliver appropriate initial treatment and transfer the patient to a higher level. As the
development of level I and level II centres is highly dependent on specially qualified
human resources which are not large in number in Romania, the plan of the Ministry of
Health is to develop the system using a regional approach for very complex cases where
university centers can function as regional referral centers becoming level I centers
whilst county hospitals should function as level II or, in case of lack of certain human
resources such as neurosurgeons, as level III centers. In order to be able to implement
such a system classification criteria where established and transfer protocols between
different levels are already established. Still as a result of a study run with Harvard
University in the year 2001/2002, results have showing that only two centers all over
Romania may qualify as level I cents whilst the need is of at least 6-8 such centers.
Most of the county hospitals qualified as level III centers and a small number as level II
centers. The reason why certain centers did not qualify to a certain level was either lack
of equipment and certain organizational structure or because of lack of certain human
resources. This component would target the development hospitals and the upgrading to
a certain designated level based on national and regional policies. At the same time it is
important to underline the fact that in Romania there is only one hospital designated for
burns patients whilst the need is of at least 4-5 centers on regional levels that must be
able to take care of such cases. This may mean the creation of new regional centers or
developing and upgrading certain small units that exist already in order to become
regional burns centers.
The way a regional level I center will be developed in the future must take into
consideration that in certain university centers, there is a need to build a completely new
building in order to replace the old pavilion structure that exists such as in Cluj and in
Iasi whilst in other university centers it will be sufficient to upgrade the actually existing
hospitals by modernizing them and eventually adding certain structures to them (§
1.2.1.a and 1.2.1.b above).
This intervention field also includes activities on reorganization of Hospitals that have
already invested to purchasing specific medical equipment and have extended their
infrastructure. The hospitals’ Business Plans could be financed under TA or the 5%

ESF-type actions eligible for financing under the overall ERDF funded Regional
Operational Programme.
1.2.1.d Improvement of prehospital medical and technical emergency response

structure
Romania has a National Ambulance system functioning under the auspices of the
Ministry of health and County Health Departments, which is the continuation of the old
system that existed before 1989. This system is organized at a county level where each
county has an independent County Ambulance Service that is mainly self-financed by
the insurance funds. The County Ambulance Services have the tasks of dealing with
emergencies, patient transport and house calls because of the lack of primary care
coverage of 24 hours/24 hours. The ambulance system is mainly concentrated in urban
areas leaving rural areas uncovered with very long response times.
At the same time, during the TAIEX expert evaluation in October 2004, the report
underlines the lack of capacity of intervention at the National/County Ambulance level
and the fact that the rural and small town level is without proper coverage. It is to be
underlined that during the last fifteen years, in a number of 8 out of 41 counties in
Romania, new complimentary structures appeared under the name “SMURD” (Serviciul
Mobil de Urgenta, Reanimare si Descarcerare) designated to deal with critical
emergencies as an integrated structure between the county fire service and the county
hospitals, with co-financing by the local authorities, where the hospitals provide the
specialized medical personnel and the fire service the paramedical and technical
personnel, as is the example in several European countries.
Such integrated teams are highly specialized in critical cases as well as in rescue
operations and are meant to complete part of the gap in the covering of the ambulance
services and to increase the quality of care when it comes to critical cases and special
rescue operations. Under the same idea of collaboration between structures of the
Ministry of Administration and Interior, local authorities and health structures, at this
moment, under the “SMURD” integrated structure, three air rescue bases are functioning
where medical personnel is coming from hospitals and technical personnel is coming
from the aviation unit of the MAI.
The future need for Romania is a minimum of 8 bases, out of which only three exist now,
as well as the building up of a whole operational infrastructure, such as landing platforms
at hospitals, to operate the helicopters properly and safely. The justification of the air-
rescue component can be easily observed when looking at the geography of Romania,
as well as when we take into consideration the future plans of regional level I centers
where critical patients need to be transferred urgently. In a certain number of these

counties, under the same integrated structure and name “SMURD” the fire services,
including the local authority funded fire services at small town and rural level started
creating first response teams dealing with critical cases as well as with other
emergencies that need fast response, covering the gap that existed beforehand. Such
examples exist in Mures County with 7 such teams and in Sibiu County with 2 such
teams. The first response teams are created by the local authorities in collaboration with
county fire services (the new County Inspectorates fro Emergency Situations).
Under this component, the overall objective is to improve the cover and capacity of
intervention of qualified prehospital medical and integrated emergency response teams
as well as to improve the quality of care offered by the different levels of the system.
The final beneficiaries will be the Hospitals, mainly the county hospitals, wishing to
create or to upgrade their integrated systems with the fire services as well as the County
Ambulance Services in order to improve the quality and cover of their services. Local
authorities that may initiate the creation or upgrading of the SMURD system may also be
members of the partnerships.
The actions included in this area of operations, are as follows:
- The development and reform of the actual County Ambulance Services, the final
beneficiary being the ambulance services.
- The development of the SMURD integrated service between hospitals and

Inspectorates for Emergency Situations targeting mainly emergency response to
critical cases and rescue operations. Final beneficiaries will be the hospitals
and/or the local authorities administering the hospitals, as well as the county fire
services. The fire services will participate in the partnership and co-finance this
component, taking into consideration the current practice and rate of efficiency.
- The development of the air rescue infrastructure functioning under the SMURD
where, besides creation of new operational bases, the local authorities need to
develop the infrastructure at local and county levels especially by creation of
authorized landing platforms at hospitals and in isolated rural areas in order to
make the use of the system safer for day and especially for night operation.
Final beneficiaries will be the county councils, the local councils, as well as the
county and local hospitals.
1.2.1.e Integrated Health Management Information System
Low quality services, duplication, frivolous/ unnecessary services delivery, high inequity
have come to a point that they are difficult to be supported by the health and social
assistance systems. They all represent symptoms of the inability of the system to

properly manage the resources it has towards meeting the health and social needs of
the Romanian population and providing appropriate services. They all contribute to the
effect of cost explosion within the system as well as to its potential bankruptcy. At
present there is no proper (integrated) tracking information in Romania with regard to the
insured and non-insured persons, unemployed, etc.
Few attempts to date have tried to contribute to the improvement of a Health Information
system that could track health expenditure and could adequately document sound
managerial decisions. However, these attempts have been implemented in peace meal
approaches with little coherence and little chances to grow into wider systems.
Designing a HSMIS can represent a breakthrough, a management and quality

improvement tool/ vehicle and not merely a control mechanism. The 2007-2013
programming is building upon the already started HSMIS project under PHARE 2004-
2006 project that is building up the infrastructure and modelling the software to be
implemented in 8 pilot regional hospitals.
The project is starting from the assumption of using a national wide and coherent HSMIS
would represent a catalyst that would improve transparency and accountability for both
managerial as well as clinical practice activities; such a system would be
multidimensional and would be created with support from different layers as the Ministry
of Health, Ministry of Administration and Interior, Ministry of Labour and Social
Protection, Ministry of Communications and Information, etc.
fields:
o Building the main infrastructure
o Purchase IT, communication equipment for the rest of 34 counties (8 are to be

equipped from PHARE 2004-2006)
o Business planning and technical assistance
1.2.2. Public Safety Infrastructure
At the beginning of the year 2005, a new law led to the integration of the Romanian Fire
Services and the Romanian Civil Protection under a single institution named the General
Inspectorate for Emergency Situations. This new institution has the tasks of dealing with
daily emergencies as well as with mass casualty incidents and disasters. It combines the
old tasks of the fires services as well as those of the civil protection including prevention
measures.

During the year 2004, a TAIEX expert committee visited Romania and evaluated the
capacity of the Romanian emergency response services to cope with major incidents as
well as with daily emergencies. The results of this evaluation was that the emergency
services lack the capacity to deal with major incidents and that this lack of capacity is
mainly due to lack of proper equipment and materials but also to the need of improved
organizational measures.
In addition, there is a serious lack of coverage by the National Ambulance Service in

small towns and rural areas. At the same time, in large cities like Bucharest, the delays
of response by the ambulance because of low capacity and traffic congestion are
significant. In addition, the capacity to respond to major incidents is not guaranteed,
especially in the case of mass casualty incidents where large number of emergency
response personnel and equipment in a certain area is required combined with rescue
operations. The TAIEX expert report (October 2004) underlines these deficiencies
putting emphasis on the lack of capacity to respond to such situations in Romania. The
current concern and need for immediate action, concerns the response capacity both to
major incidents and to daily emergencies at all levels.
1.2.2.a. Disaster & Emergency response preparedness
The General Inspectorate for Emergency Situations’ policy is to improve the capacity of
response at all three levels: local, county and regional. In each county there is a County
Inspectorate for Emergency Situations whilst on local levels there are in certain towns
and even in rural areas volunteer services that function under the local authorities and
are coordinated from operational point of view by the County Inspectorate for
Emergency Situations. The plans are to equip each county with the proper equipment
and means to deal with the major risks that exist in its surrounding area (i.e. floods,
earthquakes, chemical incidents, mass casualty incidents, etc.). At a regional level, there
will be the need for the creation or upgrading of certain regional response structures in
special rescue operations that are needed at every county or local level.
The final beneficiaries of the operations to be supported by the ROP would be the
Inspectorate for Emergency Situations and its county subordinate structures on one
hand and the local/regional authorities that detain volunteer services for emergency
situations. The interventions will be tailored at the local and county level needs after a
thorough risk evaluation done at the local and county level whilst on the regional level it
will be the task of the General Inspectorate for Emergency Situations in collaboration
with the representatives of each region to decide upon the regional support needed
based on regional evaluation of risks and needs. The domains targeted will mainly
include:

- Earthquake basic and advanced response preparedness
- Basic and advanced response to chemical incidents
- Basic and advanced response to nuclear incidents
- Basic and advanced response to mass casualty incidents including major traffic
accidents such as train accidents, terrorist attacks, etc.
- Basic and advanced response to fires including forest fires.
- Basic and advanced response to floods and other natural disasters.
- Technological accidents.
- Other major situations that necessitate the intervention of emergency response

services on the local, county or regional levels.
Interventions promoted under the present area of operations will also support the
improvement of integrated local, county level and regional communication systems by
implementation of modern systems or upgrading of already existing but insufficient
advanced communications systems.
The operations will be looking at the spreading of basic response at the local level whilst
advanced response will be at the county and regional / national level.
1.2.2.b Improvement of the emergency infrastructure
This area of operations targets the basic level of the emergency response system
represented by first response teams with trained emergency medical technicians which
is absent allover Romania with the exception of Mures and Sibiu counties which have
already introduced the first response system in addition to the mobile intensive care
units. It was identified in both counties as well by the TAIEX experts that visited these
counties and compared them to other counties in Romania, that there is a major need for
a large and widely spread basic life support and rescue structure that is functional on
day to day basis becoming the backbone of the response system in case of a major
incident or a disaster. The recommendation in the report is to use the professional and
volunteer fire services infrastructure to create this system following the examples that
were observed at the SMURD of Mures and Sibiu as well as following European and
international examples. The basic structure would be fully coordinated by the County
Inspectorates for Emergency Situations and by local authorities, whilst the role of the
hospitals or health system generally is to ensure that proper training of people working in
this structure is undertaken.

During the year 2004 the General Inspectorate for Emergency Situations started taking
steps in this way such as the creation of training centers for fire fighters as first
responders in Mures, Timis, Iasi and Prahova counties, the introduction in the curricula
of the future fire fighters of training on first response and Automated External
Defibrillation use and by including basic first response equipment including Automated
External Defibrillators on all newly purchased fire engines in order to use them as first
response units as well.
The basic intervention system would not target only medical first response. There is lack
of other basic response as well as advanced response for daily rescue operations such
as motor vehicle accidents, inland water rescue, rescue from heights, rescue from
closed spaces, urban search and rescue in case of single building collapse, rescue from
wells, etc.
The overall objective of this area of operations is the development of the basic response
system that will guarantee the existence at local and county levels of the immediate
response capacity necessary to deal with day to day emergencies, complementary to
the specialized medical services such as the Ambulance Service, and at the same time
to have the adequate capacity of a proper first response in case of a major incident or a
disaster at the local and county level until further support comes from higher levels if
needed.
The emergency response system would look like a pyramid, the base of which is the
basic response system and the top of which would be the highly qualified advanced
response teams. The use of the fire services structure in order to create this basic first
response and rescue system is based on several reasons among which we mention the
fact that the fire services are more widespread than other structures such as the
ambulance services, these services already started developing this kind of system at
county and local level and from economical point of view, it was proven in Romania as
well as in other countries that this system is operated much cheaper under the fire
service than under other structures.
The final beneficiaries of the operations will be the County Inspectorates for Emergency
Situations (professional fires services and civil protection) as well as the local fire
services functioning under the local/county/regional authorities. These will create These
will create new first response emergency and rescue services in rural and urban areas in
order to increase the overall capacity of the system, built up on the structure of fire
services (professional and volunteer), and to upgrade actually existing services.
The following scheme shows how the pre-hospital response system would look like in
the future based on actual models in Romania and future plans of development:

1
Advance
2
Ambulance Service
Emergency teams
3
Ambulance Service transport and
House visits
4
First response teams based on professional and
Volunteer fire services
Level 4 is the basic level and the mostly spread component of the system, at the same
time it is the cheapest component to operate comparing cost to efficiency and to number
of teams. This is considered a public safety component with medical implications and is
based on the fire services.
Level 3 is ensured by the ambulance service and possibly by other private organizations
and this includes patient transport and house visits. These are not normally part of the
emergency system but they are important components to the primary and health care
system.
Level 2 is also ensured by the County Ambulance Services and deals with most
emergencies that are not necessarily life threatening but that need an urgent response
and qualified care. This level is considered to be a medical or health component.
Level 1 includes the integrated advanced emergency and rescue teams as well as the
helicopter response system. This level is considered to be a mixed level between
medical/health and public safety as it includes also rescue operations.
It is to be observed that the higher the level is, the higher its cost will be and the lower
the resources will be compared to lower basic level resources that should be covering all
basic needs.
1.2.3. Social Services Infrastructure
The persistent and frequent problems resulting from insufficient financial coverage of
social assistance in the area of social services could be generally defined as follows:
o The absence of financial coverage for the operation of new social facilities prevents
them from being used;

o The repeated failure to address requirements for financial coverage of repair and
maintenance works in social facilities, including emergency conditions;
o Long-term under-investment for constructing new facilities designed specifically to

provide care to the citizens in financial or social need. Such facilities should replace
the current buildings which do not meet the structural and technical requirements,
neither do they meet the requirements to improve the life quality of citizens;
In order to improve the housing quality, as well as the quality of other services provided
in social services, it is imperative to build new Social Care Facilities that are designed
specifically for such purposes. The funds allocated cover only a fraction of what is
necessary to invest into current major projects under construction, as well as into the
projects of energy-saving and emergency nature in social care facilities (gasification of
boiler rooms, emergency condition in washing rooms and kitchens); even though such
projects are scheduled for completion.
The interventions concern the restoration of buildings and facilities of social care in order
to improve the quality of social care and social services for socially marginalized groups
and children. The above improvements are designed to enhance the quality and
effectiveness of services. They will also facilitate construction or modification of ancillary
facilities such as provision of toilets for handicapped people and the installation of air-
conditioning where appropriate.
Moreover, new kind of social services should be introduced in Romania in order to cover
a larger population spectrum that need special treatment, services that are currently
provided fragmentarily. Such new forms of social services are oriented to de-
institutionalize mental health care system, development of special structures for
discharged children, abandoned children care services infrastructure.
The upgrading of these facilities and the introduction of new kind of facilities will allow
both; a greater number of people with family member dependants and in some case the
actual beneficiaries to participate in the workforce. The operations included here are
intended to address the elimination of inequalities.
1.2.3a. De-institutionalization of mental health care system
Mental health was acknowledged by the World Health Report 2001 as crucial to the well
being of individuals and societies. A study conducted by the Bucharest Public Health
Institute to assess the disease burden as measured in DALYs in 1998 ranked mental
and behavioral disorders third in Romania at 9.98%, a situation similar to the model
predicted by Americans for 2020.

Mental health service providers are financed by the social health insurance system. The
Ministry of Health finances investment in this sector and the National Program of Mental
Health and Prevention of Psychiatric and Mental-Social Disorders. The National Health
Insurance Fund also contributes to the Program. Further sources are: local budgets,
which may finance current and major hospital repairs, NGOs which attract foreign
finance for the implementation of mental health programs, the patients themselves and
their families.
However, there are still significant disparities in the distribution of mental health services
in the territory, with hospitals in large cities being overcrowded in the absence of
community or alternative care services. The range of services is less than
comprehensive, as liaison psychiatry, forensic psychiatry, community psychiatry and
mental therapy are not officially acknowledged. And there are very few mental health
promoting and education-for- health activities, with mental health services being pre-
eminently curative.
The operations area 1.2.3.a deals with this issue providing funds to 5 distinguished but
correlating operational fields:
o Improvement of existing Public deinstitutionalization structures (e.g. creation of

protective apartments, boarding houses, Mental Health Hostels as alternative ways
of mental health treatment at community level)
o Creation of new de-institutionalization facilities (protective apartments, boarding

houses, Mental Health Hostels as alternative ways of mental health treatment at
community level)
o Improvement or establishment of Mental Health Units in General Hospitals.
o Support the existing infrastructure managed by local or regional NGOs on Mental

health care, including projects on refurbishment, furniture and utilities.
o Support the creation of special Workshops for the (re)-entrance to employment.
This operational field intends to simulate workplace environment for mentally ill or
autistic people in order to provide the necessary skills for them to (re)-enter the
workforce.
Potential Final beneficiaries for funding under this component are district health
authorities; general hospitals that plan to improve or create preventive mental health
care units, NGOs.
1.2.3b. Development of special structures for discharged children at regional level

Children discharged from foster care are likely to need ongoing, and perhaps immediate,
medical as well as social care. Studies over the past twenty years reveal that children in
state protective custody often suffer from poor health and have much higher rates of
chronic physical disabilities, birth defects, developmental delays and serious emotional
and behavioural problems than children from the same socio-economic background who
are not in out-of-home care. Their immediate unprotected entrance to workforce may
have traumatic effects
Children discharged from institution are likely to need ongoing, perhaps immediate social
and health care. For these children to lack social or health protection for any period of
time represents a serious and largely unnecessary risk to their health and the success of
their transition.
The purpose of the intervention field is to establish a new kind of social care to
discharged children in order to protect them from social exclusion during their first years
away from state protective custody. The operational field includes only the creation of
discharged children protection centres at local or/and regional level and eligible
investments include infrastructure and accommodation facilities.
1.2.3c. Development and support of social structures
The building and development of social infrastructure assists the rise in the provision
of social care and services, also contributing to increasing the quality of life of the
citizens depending from the social care facilities. This helps marginalized groups to be
an integrated part of economic and social life. The intervention field 1.2.3.c is aimed at
the restoration of buildings and facilities of social care in order to improve the quality of
social care and social services for socially marginalized groups and children.
Under the provisions of this intervention field two (2) major operational fields will be
developed:
o (Re)-building, reconstruction and installation equipment in premises that are used for
providing social care services. Eligible for funding are structures such as:
Facilities of social services for adults; facilities of social services for children;
facilities for crisis intervention; protected workrooms; facilities for maltreated
mothers with children to facilitate guidance and counselling; nursing service
stations providing day care to facilitate in particular parents participation to
workforce; daily stationeries for elderly, mentally ill and handicapped people;
pensioners facilities; social adaptation facilities; foster care facilities; facilities for
protected boarding; facilities for single parents; crisis centres; re-socialisation

facilities; contact centres for job mediation; children homes; facilities to support
Roma social inclusion.
o Establishment of Multifunctional Community Centres.
This kind of operational field will invest on reconstruction and refurbishment of

buildings at community level (e.g. buildings that used to be local hospitals and they
are currently closed or are planned to close in the near future) so as to be used for
multipurpose local social care activities. The objective is to assist the social and
professional integration of young people facing social marginalization due to
physical or racial reasons. An example of such Multifunctional Community Centre
has been funded by the World Bank and managed by the RSDF for young people
who have been disabled as a result of an accident. Similar projects could be
developed for Roma communities.
Potential Final Beneficiaries are local governments and NGOs.
1.2.3d Development and improvement of accessibility facilities for disabled people

to public buildings
It is known that the majority of the public buildings in Romania do not cover the basic
accessibility standards. Similar problem exists among the institutions and public bodies
that are responsible for the implementation of social inclusion projects and delivery of
social care services to people with accessibility difficulties (handicapped people, people
with sensitive difficulties, etc).
The proposed intervention field will invest on the restructuring of those buildings in order
to reach the acceptable European accessibility standards. The main beneficiaries under
this component will be the specific group of people, those facing accessibility difficulties
to public buildings.
Eligible operational actions under this intervention field are:
o Restructuring the buildings in order to adapt accessibility facilities
o Purchase of relevant accessibility facilities (e.g. elevators, access ramps, handicap

toilets, e.t.c.)
Potential Final Beneficiaries of the proposed intervention are municipalities, ministries,

NGOs.
1.2.3e Abandoned children care services infrastructure
The purpose of the intervention field is to establish a new kind of social care to
abandoned children in order to protect them from health risks during their first days of

their lives until they become under state protective custody. The operational field
includes only the creation special infant protection centres at local or/and regional level
and eligible investments include infrastructure and accommodation facilities.
Specific targets
Indicator Baseline Value49
(2010) (2013)
Implementation
Rehabilitation of Health
Care Units (interior-
exterior-earthquake)--(No 150 53 152
of Units)
New facilities/ blocs
New facilities/ blocs
Improvement of facilities -
utilities and energy saving
in Health Care Units (No
0 27 160
of Health Care Units)
Equipment (sets) 0 38 120
Development and reform
of the actual County
Ambulance Services 0 13 41
(number of equivelent of
projects)
Development of the
SMURD bases (no of
regions) for air rescue 3 2 5
infrastructure functioning
under the SMURD
Development of the
integrated intensive care
1 13 46
SMURD teams (no of
integrated teams)
Development of the
SMURD first response
9 70 350
and rescue teams based
at the fire departments
No of fire engines with
extrication and first 23 13 41
response equipment
Road Rescue vehicles 33 13 41
Equipment sets for civil
protection units for 0 4 8
disaster intervention
49

Protective gear 0 13 41
Result
Health Care Units
428 12% 35%
Improved (%)
Job creation in health
care units
0 0 1000
Districts covered by
8 41
SMURD
Job creation in
2000
emergency services
No of jobs created for
women in emergency 1500
services
Number of Counties
0 41
equipped
Number of new jobs
3500
created
Number of new jobs
900
(women)
Jobs created in home
25000
care services
Impact
Public Expenditure
will receive 265.99 million euro, i.e. 7.69% of the total public expenditure of the ROP
2007-2013.
3.1.3 Development and rehabilitation of education

infrastructure
The quality of educational infrastructure is directly linked with the quality of educational
services provided to children and communities. Due to the economical situation in
Romania, in the last 10 years no investments have been made in the infrastructure of

schools. The majority of schools sites are in very bad conditions and managers
appreciate any opportunity to improve the infrastructure and working conditions. The
raising dropout rates are to be explained also by deterioration of infrastructure especially
in the rural and small and medium de-industrialized urban areas. The Ministry of
Education and Research carries out programs (School Rehabilitation Program) aiming at
improving the infrastructure but the financial intervention is not consistent enough to
cover the overall needs of the system. The School Rehabilitation Programme has
already intervened to a significant number of school infrastructures in Romania (aprox.
1000) but there is a great field of intervention to less developed areas and to areas with
specific needs due to isolation and presence of Roma population.
Romania is experiencing growing disparities between regions and communities (most

evident are between rural and urban areas), which the Ministry of Education and
Research has to address urgently. The absence of the regional perspective negatively
affected the goal of supporting an equilibrated investment across the educational
system. Rural areas and small and medium de-industrialized areas are still confronted
with important needs for investments and schools rehabilitation as a precondition for
increasing access and participation to education. The available funds for investments
and rehabilitation were not evenly distributed across educational sectors. Focusing
mainly on pre university education, where the ministry has a direct responsibility, the
universities were left out. The Regional Operational Programme is the chance to balance
the investments as an important number of universities can develop their social services
and become catalysts for development at regional level.
The basic principles of the educational policy in Romania according to the Ministry of
Education can be summarized to the following paragraphs:
1. Quality assurance in education. A well-defined, coherent national framework is

necessary to ensure quality in education. Important sector progress has been made, but
a global, coherent approach and a common view on the whole system are imperative.
Thus the establishment of institutional structures at a national level to ensure quality in
education is a priority in the Action Plan for the European Integration for 2005.
2. Human resources training and development in view of lifelong learning. The training of
teachers and managers in education is the key factor of any sustainable change. A
strategy of initial and in-service training of the teachers and trainers will be developed,
as well as concrete action plans and allocation of resources. Training and career
development must be an element of attraction towards the teaching profession. E-
Learning initiative will be consistently developed, to the purpose of integrating the
Romanian society into the European Informational Society.

3. Decentralization – consolidating the local institutional capacities of formulating micro
policies and development programmes for an effective management. The schools must
become capable of managing their financial and human resources within the context of
community efforts for development. The decentralization measures will be accompanied
by an evaluation system of the quality of the educational institutions. The principles of
responsibility and subsidiary will govern the decentralization processes.
4. Promoting cultural diversity in education, in accordance with the European directions

and standards. Cultural diversity is a resource for development, and education must use
this resource by developing intercultural projects and programmes which can contribute
to a better perception of social cultural identity, to an understanding of the new emerging
reality: European citizenship.
5. Correlating the Romanian education system with the European objectives and
standards in the educational field. Priority will be given to the activities oriented towards
the European integration, as well as to the development of international relations. The
commitment of the Romanian education system in reaching the objectives established
by the Lisbon European Council in 2000, of the Copenhagen process (to develop
education and vocational and technical training) and the Bologna process (the creation
of the European space for higher education) will constitute the principal landmark of the
development policy and programmes until 2010. Romanian participation in the creation
of “the European space of education and training” will bring long-term benefits for the
young graduates. Romania can consolidate its strategic role in the region also through
its future educational programmes.
6. Increasing the participation in education; improving the access to and quality of

education for the risk groups. Economic and social cohesion is the necessity of
sustainable development. A whole range of development programmes have been and
will be initiated for areas or groups at risk: the project for rural education co-financed by
Romania and the World Bank, which is in progress and will end in 2009 (rehabilitation,
equipment, training and qualification for the teachers in middle schools). The PHARE
programme for the continuous training of teachers in pre-university education will focus
on the training of teachers in rural areas, and another PHARE programme aims at
facilitating access to education, especially of the Roma population. There will be
promoted support programmes of the type “ a second chance”, ZEP ( priority education
areas) and efforts will be made for intervention in the early stages ( kindergarten
education) to prevent school dropping-out and social, cultural and cognitive deficits.
7. Tailoring the educational offer to individual needs and to the local and regional
requirements for social economic development.

Romania cannot afford to produce unemployed people, but specialists at a European
level. Vocational and technical education must develop its capacity to adapt its
specializations so as to meet the needs of social economic development and to respond
to the need for specific competences in a knowledge-based economy. Education and
continuous professional training require a national qualifications framework and a flexible
structure of the offer, modular and based on transferable credits. An important
contribution in this direction is brought by the PHARE programmes for modernizing the
vocational and technical education.
8. Boosting innovation and research, as a basis for creative and competitive

development of economy.
There is a need to increase capacity of research and development institutions to

integrate in European Research Area and to participate in related programs. Investing
more in research and innovation at higher education level and strengthen partnership
with companies is seen as a functional connection between education and research. The
Ministry of Education aims at improving quality of research and development
infrastructure, in order to make research institutions more competitive and capable to
produce high level innovation.
In Romania, the right to education is conferred by the Constitution. According to

Education Act 84/1995, education is a national priority and should contribute to a free
and harmonious development of the individual and of his/her autonomous and creative
personality.
Public education institutions are financed by the state budget approved by Parliament.
The education budget must be at least 4% of GDP. According to Act 10/1991 on public
finance, the Ministry of Education establishes the budget that will be allocated to each
institution. The Ministry distributes the approved budgets to the subordinate units and to
the County School Inspectorates. The latter distribute the budget to their subordinate
units – the education institutions. According to Education Act 84/1995, the local
authorities out of special funds received from the government, the local budget and their
own resources meet expenditure related to the repair and maintenance of primary and
secondary schools. The Ministry of Education also finances higher education, taking into
account the recommendations of the National Council for the Financing of Higher
Education. The funds to finance research in higher education are allocated by the
Ministry of Education on the recommendation of the National Council for University
Research.
It is estimated that there are more than 115,000 classrooms at the pre tertiary level and
more than 25,000 (including laboratories) at the tertiary level. Given the general state of

buildings and equipment of schools, there is an obvious shortage of financial resources.
The poor physical condition of many schools which need urgent rehabilitation remains a
problem: insufficient heating, lack of public transportation in rural areas, lack of
educational equipment, obsolete books and documentation, lack of computers and
software, etc.
The fact that some schools (including some private ones) are much better equipped than
others is an important factor of imbalance. The decentralization process, which started in
1995 and was accelerated in 2000, may increase this imbalance if the Ministry does not
take measures to equalize or compensate for regional and local differences. In 1995, the
responsibility for maintenance was transferred to local authorities, while in 2000 this was
extended to investments and current expenditures. According to the law, the MER
continues to be responsible for the salaries of personnel, textbooks, scholarships, in-
service training of teachers, etc. This new organization introduces institutional contracts
with local authorities and schools on a need-based allocation of resources: funding is
based on the number of students and an estimated average cost of students at different
levels of education. The structural distribution of resources – 85% for current
expenditure and 15% for capital investment – and the high pressure on current
expenditures because of the claims to improve salaries, do not leave much room to
rehabilitate schools and invest in educational equipment. Finally, the education’s low
share of GDP is not at the solution bringing direction. It should be mentioned however
that under a loan by the World Bank a significant number of schools have been
rehabilitated (almost 1000 schools which equals to the 1/30 of the total building
infrastructure in education)
Priority 1.3 proposes fields of intervention on basic school infrastructure of all levels so
as to improve the quality of the educational system and support access to education for
all Romanian people.
Construction, rehabilitation, maintenance and equipment of kindergartens, primary and

secondary education schools units (including the introduction of new information and
communication technologies -ICT equipment).
There are several challenges that directly affect the quality of infrastructure in education,
given mainly by the budgetary limitations.
! Romania extended the compulsory education to ten years. This is especially

problematic in rural areas that cannot provide high school education to the pupils

in their areas. They usually have to go to study the last two years out of their
locality. This is putting pressure on the infrastructure of the high schools that
have to provide basic accommodation services to the pupils enrolled.
! Romania undertook a broad process of returning the property to initial owners

before the nationalization during the communist regime. This affects schools
hospitals and a large number of buildings put to public use. This process has an
impact at several communities that have to find consistent financial resources to
rent out or build the necessary facilities for education.
! In recent period Romania experienced very serious floods that deteriorated the
existing infrastructure in a number of areas.
! The contribution of local communities and public authorities towards improving

educational infrastructure is rising but it needs to be further stimulated and
increased. This problem will be addressed during the decentralization processes
where o significant number of competencies and resources will be directly
channeled to school and local institutions.
! The capacity of financing infrastructure in higher education is very low especially

in provincial small and medium universities.
Due priority will be given to rehabilitating the stock of unsafe, earthquake-damaged

schools in imminent danger of collapse, that pose a daily physical threat to school
occupants.
The interventions included in priority 1.3 of the ROP are those directed toward poor and
disadvantaged areas, where education can be a critical resource in community
development.
! Rural areas
! Small and medium de-industrialized urban areas
! Communities having a significant number of disadvantaged minority population
! Underdeveloped regions
The interventions will be directed towards the following categories of school units
! Special schools (disabilities)
! Early childhood education (kindergarten education)
! Primary

! Lower and upper secondary education (including technical and vocational
education and training)
! Universities
ROP priority 1.3 will include the following operations:
1.3.1 Improving Basic Infrastructure of schools especially at rural areas - all levels
According to School rehabilitation Programme (Proiectul de Reabilitare a Infrastructurii

Scolare - plan 2005-2009) a great number of schools need to be rehabilitated the
following years. A number (est. to 1000) of schools have been already rehabilitated
under a World Bank loan but this is a fragment of the real need in refurbishing the
education infrastructure in Romania.
The aim here is to improve the infrastructure of schools including, in particular, the
renovation of existing buildings and construction of extensions, where appropriate, to
improve their standard and technical equipment with a view to increasing the quality of
education in the regions. The overall objective is, in particular to achieve an increased
participation rate of students from socially disadvantaged environments, e.g. Roma.
The actual technical state of most buildings and associated facilities (including teaching
tools) is in a poor condition. This educational stock of buildings has suffered from under-
investment over an extended period of time.
The operational fields included here are:
o Reconstruction and extension of school buildings
o Building, rehabilitation, maintenance of kindergartens, schools located in

disadvantaged communities (focused on Roma communities)
o Upgrading of the central heating system (conversion of the energy source to gas
where feasible)
o Modernization of the utilities and ancillary services within the school complex
o Equipment for classrooms, and libraries
Potential Final Beneficiaries are the local School Councils and Universities.
1.3.2 Improvement of Conditions for Disabled Students
The majority of the educational infrastructure lacks of accessibility standards and utilities
for students with disabilities. The proposed field of intervention suggests investments on
special equipment and modern utilities designed specially for disabled students in the
educational system. Three kinds of operational activities are planned:

o Transportation means
o Facilities in School
o Special Teaching Equipments and utilities
Potential Final Beneficiaries are the local School Councils and Universities.
1.3.3 Improving the ICT potential of schools/ universities
In 2001 the Romanian Government made a first decisive step in a systematic approach
of improving the ICT infrastructure. Governmental decided the introduction of 500 000
computers in the Romanian schools and high schools (the equivalent of rising the
number of PCs per 100 pupils in primary and secondary education by approx. 6,
accompanied by the provision of Internet connection and educational software. As a
characteristic feature of Romanian program of increasing the ICT penetration in the
educational system, the penetration rates per pupil for different levels of education show
a more pronounced dispersion than for the average for the candidate countries in favour
of tertiary education. This unbalance is expected to decline, as more resources were
oriented further towards undergraduate education. During 2003, is the endowment in the
secondary education that saw the highest increase reaching 10.4 PCs per 100 pupils.
With this progress, Romania is now among the countries in central and Eastern Europe
with the highest level of endowment in the secondary education, with only Hungary and
Cyprus reporting comparable levels (EC (2004)) (the region average is 6.5).
However, Romania is still lagging behind in the endowment of the primary schools, at
less than half of the candidate countries average. The ROP operations of this area of
interventions will invest on improving the ICT potential to all educational levels and
especially the primary level.
Potential Final Beneficiaries of the operations are the local School and High schools
councils, Universities.
1.3.4 Improvement of VET/CVT Infrastructure
The on-going preparatory work for the rehabilitation of VET schools (Phare 2001 &
2002) includes the elaboration of a number of feasibility studies for the type and extent
of the interventions needed by the VET structure. Out of the total number of secondary
VET schools, there are 111 prioritized to receive assistance to improve building
infrastructure (workshops, laboratories, etc). Tender dossiers are under preparation for
a total amount of about 8 million euro. Further building infrastructure rehabilitation and
workshops’ equipment may be foreseen for support by ROP operations at a later stage.

Specific targets
(2010) (2013)
Implementation
Rehabilitation of Hospitals 0 53 152
(interion-exterior-
earthquake)--(No of
Hospitals)
Improvement of facilities - 0 27 160
utilities and energy saving
in Hospitals (No of
Hospitals)
Equipment (sets) 0 38 120
Development and reform
of the actual County
Ambulance Services
(number of equivalent of
projects) 0 13 41
Development of SMURD
bases (in no of regions) 3 2 5
Development of the air
rescue infrastructure
functioning under the
SMURD (no of Health
care Units) 0 13 41
Equipment (Sets) 0 13 41
Development of special
social structures (number) 13 41
Creation of Day care
centres for infants
(number) 13 41
centres for children
(number) 13 41
centres for elderly 13 41
centres for Vulnerable
Groups (number) 13 41
deinstitutionalized
infrastructure for mental
health (new or improved 80
50

existing structures)
Rehabilitation of 1000 101 320
Educational Infrastructure
Units
Rehabilitation of Units in 38 120
Rural and Disadvantaged
areas
Upgrading of the central 0 13 40
heating system (no of
schools)
Modernization of the 126 400
utilities and ancillary
services within the school
complex
Equipment for 150 480
classrooms, and libraries
(sets)
Transportation (Units) 13 40
Facilities in School (no of
Schools) 95 200
Special Equipments (no of
schools) 133 200
Number of IST projects 126 400
Number of IT Units 2625 5000
Number of VET
infrastructure to receive
assistance 111
Result
Hospitals Improved (%) 428 12% 35%
Number of Counties
equipped 0 41
Deinstitutionalized metal
health patients (%) 15%
Population Coverage of
available classrooms (%)
Number of Schools
Improved the conditions
for disabled children 1000 95 200
Number of PCs per 100
students 6 10
Number of Educational
Institutions Connected to
Internet (new) 1365 1200
Increase of available VET
schools (%)
Jobs created during the
implementation phase
(man/year) 1000
Impact
Jobs created and 0 0 250
preserved
Improvement of the
average of days of
inpatient treatment
Improvement of the
average response time of
the system (minutes) 7
Improvement of Mental
health population
coverage (%)
Public Expenditure
will receive 178 million euro, i.e. 5.15% of the total public expenditure of the ROP 2007-
2013.
3.2 Priority 2: Strengthening of regional and

local economies
The NDP specific objectives for regional development address two fundamental issues,
namely competitiveness of regions as business locations, and supporting the
regional/locals economies affected by industrial restructuring or traditionally
underdeveloped.
By evaluating the operation of the existing business support structures, and by

identifying potential needs of the SMEs, the actions that may receive support by the
ROP may be grouped as presented in the following list:
1. Support the creation of BSS in the regions, and the creation of business support
networks for businesses
2. Enhance infrastructure of the business support structures; rehabilitate industrial

areas/zones
3. Support the increase of the quality and types of services provided by BSS

4. Support relocation of industries, with respect to urban regeneration
5. Support the creation of business partnerships in an applied manner (for

exhibitions, promotion centers, etc)
6. Increase level of interaction between business support structures and businesses
7. Promote the modernization of companies (firms, as recipients of better quality

services from BSS, they can modernize in production, service provision, and
applied innovation
8. Provide incentives to businesses, especially SMEs, to use services provided by

BSS (i.e. energy costs, tax breaks)
9. Enhance legislation to help business support structures become more

competitive
10. Support integrated activities with other priorities of the NDP
11. Human resource development
12. Improve the use of ICT
The areas of ROP operations are classified in the following general categories, which
determine priorities, and general implementation timeframe parameters:
• Infrastructure
• Training
• ICT Technology
• Innovation
• Support regional comparative advantages
• Integrated actions under ROP
• Potential integrated actions with other OPs
• Potential complimentarity with state regulations/ legislation
• Regional capacity factor
All areas of intervention are important, when considering an integrated approach to

Regional Operational Programming. Prioritization can be done, according to the
technical nature of the interventions, especially as regards to implementation timeframe,
and links with other Sectoral Operational Programmes (in particular the SOP “Increasing
Economic Competitiveness”, the SOP “Transport Infrastructure” and the SOP “Human
Resources Development”), even links with state policies (at implementation time).

Special care must be given to the timing factor of the implementation of the
interventions, especially as it relates to other Operational Programs in Romania, as
analyzed in the following table:
Intervention
Implementation Time frame Comments
category
Throughout implementation
period. Emphasis be given at the In some cases there may be a
beginning of the programming need for a business plan to be in
Infrastructure
1 period, especially when place. Other funding tools should
related activities
infrastructure has to do with be taken into consideration before
buildings, utility networks, and SF programming period.
other major infrastructure work.
2 Training
period
At beginning of the implementation

period, if no other needs for
infrastructure work is needed.
Beginning to middle of the
3 ICT Technology In the middle of the implementation
implementation period
period onward, and in any case to
be synchronized with other
infrastructure projects.
There is a need for ROP and SOP-
period, in some instances there
Competitiveness to be inline, both
4 RDI may need be a necessity for
adhering to policies by relevant line
building infrastructure to
ministries
completed
Existence of regional studies must

be in place, to determine
comparative advantages in terms
Support regional
Throughout implementation of production and product
5 comparative
period development, RDI, and generally,
advantages
define the schemas under which
SMEs will receive support (ROP
vs. SOP Competitiveness)
Integrated actions Throughout implementation In line with the other interventions

6
under ROP period under the ROP
Potential In line with respective Operational

7 integrated actions Programmes (i.e Competitiveness,
period
other OPs Transport)

Intervention
Implementation Time frame Comments
category
Potential
complimentary
Before the beginning of Modification or Creation of
8 activities with
implementation period legislation
state regulations/
legislation
Prepare regions (stakeholder Examine regional capacities,

Regional capacity organizations) in the interim exploitation of other funding
9
factor period (currently until January programs to increase local
2007) capacities
The above ROP actions are structured around three areas of interventions, from which
will derive the relevant operations for the implementation of the operations:
2.1 Improvement/setting-up of business and RDI support infrastructure
2.3 Support of the business and innovation services
The following table presents the alignment of the ROP areas of intervention with the new
architecture proposed by the Community strategic guidelines for regional development
for the period 2007-2013. The alignement can be direct (D) or indirect (I) as shown by
the relevant symbol.
The new architecture for growth strategies in the regions
ROP Areas of
for the period 2007-201351
Intervention
relating to the Facilitate Improve access to
Increase and Promote the
Business innovation and finance
improve information society
Environment promote
investment in RTD for all
entrepreneurship
2.1
Improvement/setti
ng-up of business D D I I
and RDI support
infrastructure
2.2 Support and
modernization of D
local and regional I D I
businesses
2.3 Support of
business and I
innovation I I D
services
51
Community strategic guidelines: Priority 2, Knowledge and innovation for growth.

Objectives of priority 2
The aim of priority 2 of the Romanian ROP is to establish the grounds upon which
regional and local economies will be strengthened. The major directions, which will affect
this priority, are, through the improvement/setting-up of the business related
infrastructure, support of the modernization of local and regional businesses, and the
support of business services through the business support structures.
The priority is in line with priorities two and three of the Community strategic guidelines
and with the first and second objectives of the NDP 2007-2013 priority “Supporting the
balanced development of all regions”.
More specifically, actions implemented under this priority will be presented under the
following three areas of operations:
2.1 Improvement/setting-up of business and RDI support infrastructure
The operation is of regional interest and it aims at strengthening the regional capacity in
providing services to businesses, especially to SMEs, and strengthening RDI support
infrastructure.
The specific objectives target at alleviating regional disparities in SME support, and
tackle the concentration of business infrastructure (business support structures), in the
Bucharest area. As the business related support analysis highlights, severe side
implications of such concentration are to be immediately addressed and in particular:
- State budget allocation to RDI and related expenditures
- Concentration of qualified labour force in a small number of localities
- Maintaining labour and qualifies human resources’ gaps between regions
In order to overcome the afore-mentioned lacks and regional disparities, ROP actions
will concentrate in supporting the regional capacities in business and RDI support
innovation infrastructure.
It includes:
1. Creation of business and/or RDI support infrastructure in the Romanian regions
2. Improvement of the infrastructure of the entities currently operating as service

providers to businesses (i.e. Science & Technology Parks, Industrial Parks,
Business Incubators, Consultancy Centers, Business and Professional

Associations, and the various types of Technology Transfer Entities and
Universities).
3. Business support structure relocations (including relocations of industrial parks)
4. Synergies with ROP’s urban regeneration actions and actions of the Sectoral
Operational Programme for Environment
Indicative projects that will be financed under this area of interventions are the building
and/or rehabilitation of buildings, the improvement or the creation of the utility and other
networks within those entities.
Moreover, this intervention will assist the procurement and the modernization of existing
equipment (i.e. laboratories) for support structures in business and RDI, and to promote
the use of ICT into the functioning of those entities
It will also support the support networks in business, production and RDI, the creation of
technology relay centers, and business and research networks, as a means of
supporting SMEs and further strengthening local and regional economies.
The modernization of local and regional businesses will normally occur after three
elements are provided: The first is the existence of a entrepreneur friendly business
environment provided by the state, the second is to establish a business support system
easily accessible to entrepreneurs, and the third to support business through grant
schemes, including businesses involved in RDI. While the first is a more horizontal issue
(must be addressed by SOP Competitiveness), aspects of the rest two can be
addressed with a regional variation.
The regional distribution of SMEs shows a massive concentration in Bucharest which

counts for approximately 21.4 %, followed by North-East region with 13.7 % and South-
East and Center with over 12%. In Romania, from all active businesses, 86,56% are
those with less than 10 employees. Another significant disparity among the Romanian
regions is the R&D expenditure in the Business enterprise sector, as percentage of
GDP. The national analysis shows that Romania, in total, still spends less than EU 15
(1.29%), EU 25 (1.25%), and CEE 10 (0.33%). In the relevant regional comparative
analysis, Sud with 0.470%, and Bucharest in second place with 0.410%, spend more
than the CEE 10, and twice as much as the national percentage on GDP for Romania,
is. This leaves the rest of the regions in Romania far behind, with Centru at 0.210%,

Sud-Est at 0.110%, Sud-Vest at 0.100%, Vest at 0.100%, Nord-Est at 0.090%, and
Nord-Vest at 0.070%.
As a consequence of the above situation, and in terms of regional distribution of GDP, in

2001, Bucharest, with 250719.4 billion lei representing 22% from the total is ranked first,
far ahead of all the others regions, which count for the lowest 9% (South–East) up to
12% (North-East, Center, North-West and South).
R&D expenditure in the Business enterprise sector, as percentage of GDP in 2002 for
Romania is very low (0,23%), compared to EU 25 (1.29%). Yet, within the country there
is a significant concentration in “Sud” (0.47%) and “Bucharest” (0,41) regions. Also,
human resources in R&D as % of total employment, for 2002, were 0.77% for
“Bucharest” region, and 0,20 for the entire country. This difference is explained by the
fact that at regional level the respective percentages vary from 0.25% (Sud), to 0.08
(Sud-Est).
Disparities across the regions continue, as the figures for Regional Gross Investments of
active enterprises per capita reveal. In 2002, the per capita gross investments for
Bucharest was at almost 1600 euros, and the rest of the regions, in far distance, are
South-East (672,5 euros), West (640,4 euros), Center (589,2 euros), South-West (469,1
euros), North-West (448,5 euros), South (421 euros), and the North-East at 315,1 euros
per capita. The same indicator, but this time looking at the relationship of regional gross
investments of active enterprises to the number of active enterprises, also shows
regional disparities: For active enterprises which employee up to 49 workers (which
comprise the vast majority of active enterprises), the average gross investments for
Bucharest is 18.983, for Center 11.191, West 10.768, North-West 10.196, North-East
8.445, South 8.277, South-East 8.107, South-West 6.890. All previous values are in
euros.
This sub-measure aims at promoting, through financial support, the enterprise

investments in modern methods of doing business. Such investments are in IT systems,
modern production methods and processes, use of applied innovation and technology,
taking into consideration regional comparative advantages, and the disparities in the
level of gross investments across the regions.
Indicative actions under this measure are:
- Electronic fleet tracking systems
- Automated systems for storing goods
- E-commerce / e-business systems

- Microelectronics and nano-technologies
- Natural resource management
- Waste management
- Other environmental applications
- Business networks that combine production-distribution
- Other
2.3 Support of business and innovation services
The analysis of the existing situation in business support structures in Romania showed
that there is a need for improving the services provided to SMEs, in terms of quality and
quantity (diversification of services). It is interesting to fact that in Romania, it is reported
that Business Consultancy Centers’ clients return to the center – to receive consultation
– once and twice (100%), but returns of 3 or more times is very low, at 16.7%. Another
indicative fact is that in Romanian Business Incubators the average occupancy rate is at
75%, and in the case of the industrial parks, the usage rate, in most cases, varies from
12% to 70%.
The aim of this area of operations is two-fold:
- To assist business support structures to improve the quality of the services they
provide and to diversify them
- To promote the use of professional services by businesses, especially SMEs
The ROP areas of intervention will concentrate at:
1. Supporting activities that build service provision capacities in business, RDI entities,
including the creation of business, RDI resource reference databases, systems that
make available economic data/information and other statistics to SMEs, combined
business-IT services. Also, diversification of services may include increasing
capacities (conventional or electronic based) in providing services in various
business functions, such as, marketing, project management, finance, advertising,
web site constructing, e-business, etc.
2. Supporting entrepreneurs (thus businesses) to use the services provided by

technology incubators, science and technology parks, business consultancy centers,
or generally, assist businesses’, especially SMEs’ request professional services from
the existing or new business support structures in Romania. Moreover, it will support

relocation of businesses, especially SMEs, in business support structures (i.e.
Industrial Parks, Science & Technology Parks, Business Incubators).
The above actions will be used as a real tool in closing the gap of services needed and
services provided, and also increase local and regional relevant capacities.
Potential final beneficiaries are SMEs that require professional assistance, business
service providers aiming at enhancing and expanding the services provided, SMEs in
the productive sector, RDI and Technology Transfer and Innovation infrastructure.
Partnerships can be built between private enterprises in the service and craft sectors,
local research institutions, business support structures, and local authorities.
Specific targets
(2010) (2013)
Implementation
Industrial Parks created
52 66 70
/ relocated
Business Consultancy
28 42 56
Centers created
Science and
Technology Parks 6 9 12
created / relocated
Business Incubators
22 33 44
created / relocated
Technology Transfer
and Innovation related 13 19 26
infrastructure
Industrial Parks
assisted in
enhancing/renovating 0 7 15
infrastructure
Science and
Technology Parks
assisted in 0 2 3
enhancing/renovating
infrastructure
Business Incubators
0 7 14
assisted in
52

infrastructure
Technology and
Information Centers
assisted in 0 6 13
infrastructure
RDI institutions
assisted in improving
0 50 122
their laboratory
equipment
Number of businesses
modernized production
and/or distribution 0 750 1500
methods
adapting innovating
0 750 1500
methods (applied
innovation)
adapting e-Business 0 750 1500
applications
adapting enterprise-
0 750 1500
resource-planning
systems
Business Support
Structures assisted in
improving services 0 53 98
provided to businesses
RDI entities assisted in
improving the services 0 80 135
provided to end-users
assisted by new, SF co-
financed business 0 10000
support services
assisted by business
support services (i.e.
per year/per region)
relocations to resided in 0 500
business support

structures
Results
Percent increase of
0 54%
Industrial Parks
Percent increase of
Business Consultancy 0 100%
Centers
Percent increase of
Science and 0 100%
Technology Parks
Percent increase of
0 100%
Business Incubators
Percent increase of
Technology and
0 100%
Innovation related
infrastructure
Percent of Industrial
- 29%
Parks assisted
Percent of Science and
Technology Parks - 50%
assisted
Percent of Business
- 64%
Incubators assisted
Percent of Technology
and Information - 100%
Centers assisted
RDI institutions
- 100%
assisted
Percent of business
support structures that
70%
improved services
provided
Percent of RDI entities
that improved services 100%
provided
New types of services
0 25 50
created (number)
Percent of total number
320.000 3%
of businesses assisted
Impact
Number of employees
(SMEs), Bucuresti

Number of employees
(SMEs), Centru
Number of employees
(SMEs), Nord-Est
Number of employees
(SMEs), Nord-Vest
Number of employees
(SMEs), Sud
Number of employees
(SMEs), Sud-Est
Number of employees
(SMEs), Sud-Vest
Number of employees
(SMEs), Vest
Percent of Industrial
- 29%
Parks assisted
Percent of Science and
Technology Parks - 50%
assisted
Percent of Business
- 64%
Incubators assisted
Percent of Technology
and Information - 100%
Centers assisted
RDI institutions
- 100%
assisted
Increase the survival
rate of businesses
Increase the frequency
businesses seek
business support
services
Public Expenditure
On the basis of the basic distribution and the operations included in it, ROP priority 2 will
receive 630 million euro, i.e. 18.22% of the total public expenditure of the ROP 2007-
2013.

3.3 Priority 3: Development of regional and local
tourism
Tourism will receive ROP support for a number of reasons, mainly because:
! It is an industry of growing economic importance (revenues, employment, foreign

exchange, export trade, etc.);
! It can be a driving force in bringing about sustainable development and has

enormous potential for helping to regenerate our towns and cities, and the
countryside; and
! It can help create a more inclusive society by enabling more people to enjoy the
benefits of a work break, a week end, or a more formal holiday.
The socio-economic specific benefits of domestic and incoming tourism are multiple; the
most important ones are:
! generation of income and employment and distribution of these across the

country,
! the receipt of foreign currency (from international tourism),
! contribution to Government revenues (VAT, company tax, income tax, customs

and excise, etc.),
! improving the image of the country abroad (in case of favorable experiences by
the visitors), stimulating the export of goods and services.
To ensure a balanced growth of tourism, the objectives for development of the sector
should include the following considerations:
1. Tourism development should be sustainable, i.e. should proceed in a planned and

orderly manner so as to provide optimum and durable benefits to the people of
Romania, and to ensure that any adverse impacts on the natural, social and
cultural environment and on the general quality of life are minimized;
2. The concept of sustainable development necessitates striking a careful balance

between facilitating tourism growth (and its linkages with other economic sectors)
and protection of the environment on which tourism depends,
3. Sustainability also encompasses the concept of quality, which is seen as not

necessarily only synonymous with particular types of tourist facilities, but a
reflection of promoting continuous improvement in the value-for-money provided
for visitors in each Region throughout their stay in Romania;

4. The tourism sector should be developed within a framework that makes full use of
Romania’s rich combination of natural and cultural resources and gives an
opportunity to actualize the qualities and potential of the human resources at the
local level; and finally,
5. The development should stimulate tourism initiatives and investment at the “place
of consumption”, i.e. at regional and local host level.
Whether a country, or any tourist destination for that matter, can exploit its tourism
resources to their full potential is dependent on many factors. The view that the provision
of basic access and accommodation, offered at a reasonable price, will automatically
bring in tourists, is no longer valid. And even if it does, the economic benefits from the
type of tourism that results from such limited action and investment are marginal. A more
integrated tourism planning approach is necessary.
The ROP priorities are not the vehicle to establish national tourism policy and to
determine strategy; this has to be studied at the national level and requires a detailed
examination of a number of factors. Given, however the confirmed importance of tourism
sector, horizontal measures that assist the Regions to develop their tourism product and
to improve their tourism capacity with support of the private sector involvement in
tourism, are justified.
Tourism stimulates other economic activities since it depends to a large extend on goods
and services produced in other sectors, such as air and land transport, utilities,
construction, food and beverage industries, handicrafts production, etc.
The Government Program 2005-2008 and the National Development Plan have clearly
identified the importance of tourism for Romania, and include a number of specific and
also indirect references that support tourism as a target sector where interventions
financed by the Structural Funds are justified.
The Government Program 2005-200853 states as the objectives in the field of tourism:
Increase in tourist circulation in the country
Diversification of the tender and increase of the quality of tourist services
Additionally, it is stated that the Government aims to double the revenue from tourism
until 2008.
The main measures that the Romanian Government will promote, in order to capitalize
the national tourist potential, aim at the following aspects54:
53
Government Program 2005-2008 Chapter 14 « Policy in the field of tourism » p.78

! Defining and promotion of a national tourist brand for individualization,
personification and assuring a specific attractiveness to the national tender, both
for final consumers and investors;
! Establishing priorities in developing the infrastructure to support the tourism in

correlation with developing the general infrastructure;
! Functioning of the consultancy organisms between the tourism industry and local
and central public administration;
! Transferring to private sector, in conformity with international practice of the

marketing, promotion, licensing, patenting and classification within tourism;
! Use of a share part from funds for professional conversion of the unemployed
persons, for their schooling and training in professions and trades specific to
tourism;
! Use of information technology within the action to promote tourism
As regards regional development, it is also important to note that the Government’s

Program intends to improve regional competitiveness, and the measures55 that are
included under this heading (and support the stated below tourism priority measures),
include:
1. Stimulating the creation of the industrial cluster system in all regions
2. Expansion of the programs for encouraging the exports
3. Implementation of human resource development programs after a

previous evaluation of the potential in cooperation with private sector
Finally, in the Government Program there is a declared interest as regards the

environment; particularly for tourism development, the following reference is
56
applicable :
4. Expansion of the national network of protected areas and natural

reservations, rehabilitation of the Romanian seaside infrastructure,
ecological and economic resizing of the Danube Delta
The National Development Plan also identifies tourism as an important aspect of the
economic activity in Romania.
54
i.d. p. 78
55
Government Program 2005-2008 Chapter 15 « Regional development policy» p.80
56
i.d. Chapter 18 “Policy upon the environment protection” p. 93

Priority 3 of the ROP will mainly reply to the 3rd NDP 2007-2013 specific objective
“Capitalize on the touristic and cultural potential of the regions and increase these fields
contribution to the regions’ development”. It is also in line with the requirements of the
Community strategic guidelines for cohesion.
Tourism represents a real tool of economic growth, whereas it creates employment

opportunities, through valorification of specific natural and cultural assets of every
development region, including marginal areas, economically and socially disadvantaged.
Moreover, tourism creates economic diversification opportunities at local level, as a
result of incomes capitalization, obtained at local level.
At present the contribution of the Romanian tourism to the national economy is still
insignificant compared to other competitive countries’ achievements, including Central
and Eastern European countries57. The tourist sector has a direct contribution to the
GDP of 2.6%, an insignificant value if considering the weights of the other countries
(Hungary 10%, Poland 13.1%)58.
Approximately 42.7% of Romania’s tourism accommodation capacity is provided by the

Black Sea resorts, 16.3% in Bucharest and county capitals (exclusively Tulcea), 15.7%
in Spas, 11.6% in mountain resorts, 0.8 % in the Danube Delta and 12.9 % of beds on
other tourist routes and destinations.
While the mere existence accommodation capacity does not automatically follow in that
there will be an equivalent flow of tourism arrivals and bed nights, the large differences
between Romanian Regions definitely indicate that there is substantial potential for
equitable and balanced development of tourism activity in the Regions.
Capitalizing on tourist attractions from the various regions of the country may contribute
to the economic growth of certain declining urban centres, by encouraging the creation
and development of local companies and turning areas with low economic
competitiveness into investor attracting areas.
The tourist activity created demands for a large scale of goods and services,
subsequently purchased by tourists and tourism companies, including goods and
services provided by other economic sectors (construction, food industry, small and
crafts industry).
Tourism also has a lot of potential in creating cooperation between local companies,
between them and the companies operating in other economic sectors, as well as in the
57
Introducere în Secţiunea 2.5 Turism, PND 2004-2006
58
Introduction to Section 2.5 Tourism NDP 2004-2006

creation of clusters. Tourism also has a positive impact on discrepancies in the sex
structure of the unemployed, by mainly using a female work force.
A number of internal studies show the increase of interest for Romanian touristic
attraction, regarding both Romanian and foreign tourists. Thus, if in 2000 it was
registered a number of 5264 thousands tourists, in 2004 the number was grown at 6600
thousands. Similarly, the number of overnights of romanian tourists increased from
13862 thousands (2000) to 13980 thousands (2004), and also the overnights of foreign
tourist from 2085 thousands (2000) to 3211 thousands (2004). În plus, the level of
expenditures realised in tourism field increased from 359 milions dollars (2000) to 800
milions dollars (2004).
In internal field, young population manifests a high desire to know their own country,
choosing the cultural tourism, mountain tourism (“back to nature” type), while aged
population, in growing number, has an increasing interest regarding spa resorts, whose
curative properties attract including foreign tourists. In external field, Romania is a new
touristic destination – in the context of an international touristic market that has respond
to a higher request of “new holiday experiences”- , or is discovered by foreign tourists
which benefited by vacations before 1990; it must to consider the touristic incoming flow,
in continuous growing, especially regarding both the European tourists (their number
increased from 5074 thousands in 2000 to 6361 thousands in 2004) and the American
tourists (95 thousands in 2000, 139 thousands in 2004). Moreover, the average length of
stay increased from 3,2 nights (2000) to 3,25 nights (2004).
Support for tourism is also important because Romania at present seems to fluctuate
around the 3% mark in the overall demand in the World Tourism Region, which however
is showing an increasing trend (see graphs in Annex).
Romania’s share in the overall world demand has been erratic (fluctuating between 0.06
and 0.13% most recently) and support of the tourism sector should give stability on one
hand and the basis for positive development in the future. From 2004 onwards it seems
there is an increase in demand in absolute numbers (, which is reflected also in the
expected increased demand for the Region as a whole.
Tourism development must observe the principles of a lasting development, in order to

preserve and protect the natural and cultural patrimony, as well as to reduce the human
pressure on the environment, which is inherent in cases of large scale tourism.
Capitalizing on tourist attractions is mostly limited by the quality of the environment
infrastructure, which is also a major obstacle in the development of tourism. The growing
number of tourists, which is to expect as it develops, will exhaust the natural
environment and affect the balance of the ecosystem. The pressure on the environment

must be softened in areas with a special natural patrimony, in order to be able to use it in
a lasting manner.
Implementing the national tourism strategy in Romania, as well as regional strategies,

may cause a quality increase up to European standards of the entire tourism conditions,
which have a direct impact on the growth of the tourism demand for Romania, as an
European tourist destination.
Directly and indirectly the proposed areas of ROP operations are applicable in different
Romanian Government policy areas59, such as:
- Support to productive activities
- Skills formation
- Investment and transport
- Tourism promotion
- Rural development
- Innovation
The operations are also directly supportive to the development of SMEs considering that
generally tourism products and services are offered by a large number of very small and
small enterprises, many of them family-type businesses, and contribute to the creation or
maintenance of jobs.
Also, to the extent that the tourism priority implementation supports the attraction of
foreign tourists, there is a direct benefit in the balance of payments (generation of foreign
income).
Priority 3 areas of oeprations cover these aspects.
Two mainstream areas of operations are proposed under the tourism development
priority of the ROP:
3.1 Rehabilitation of touristic areas, renovation of historical and cultural patrimony,

protection/ rehabilitation of natural heritage
3.2 Support of tourist income generation activities (development and promotion of

touristic offer, related infrastructure, business activities)
The primary objectives intended to be satisfied by the implementation of the ROP, are
the following:
59
NDP 2004-2007

- Valorisation of existing or un-realized touristic resources (historic, monumental,
natural, cultural, etc.)
- Creation of additional sources of income for local residents
- Improvement of local standard of living
- Creation of new jobs
- Protection and maintenance of local cultural heritage
- Maintenance of demographic balance (retention of young)
- Promotion of tourism destinations
- Promotion of specific tourism attractions
- Assistance / support to increase competitiveness of tourism enterprises
- Improvement/upgrading of available facilities
- Creation of new forms of specialized (“thematic” or “niche”) touristic activities
- Training of un-employed for work in the tourism sector
- Training of staff of tourism enterprises to upgrade desired skills
Selection overall criteria, for the determination of which proposals by final beneficiaries
will be accepted for financing, and at the same time indicators of expected success60, for
tourism projects evaluation for financing, should include (indicative list):
- Increase in visitor numbers at the tourist destinations or sites/ monuments or

attractions
- Increase in number of bed nights
- Number of interventions effected categorized by type (i.e. building renovations,

restorations, site protection actions, etc.)
- Increase in the average visitor stay duration
- Increase in numbers of tourists per specific “niche” activity
- Increase in number of visitors by geographical origin (domestic and foreign)
- Number and financial value of the interventions
- Increase or changes in the sectoral employment positions
60
The PHARE Programming Document for Economic and Social Cohesion of Romania, identifies a number
of additional indicators for tourism related activities (such as satisfaction rates of visitors), which however,
require implementation of field surveys in order to monitor them

- Reduction of unemployment
- Increase in Government, Regional, County and Municipal revenue from taxes

and other assessments
- Number and type of promotional activities undertaken
- Number of “visits” to web sites created for the promotion of attractions
- Number of electronic reservations effected, for reservation systems
- Number of queries by visitors at Information Centres / points established
- Number and type of operating professional groups established
The indicators, which are of comparative values, require that adequate statistical data
are collected and monitored in the period before the implementation of the interventions.
It is evident that for the selection for financing the operations proposed by the potential
final beneficiaries, these should satisfy the general criteria of actions under the ROP and
have the required “maturity” characteristics, to ensure adequate progress and absorption
of the funds.
The main objectives to be accomplished by implementing the Regional Operational

Program are:
- Capitalizing on the existing tourist resources and on those that have not yet been
introduced in the tourist circuit (monuments, historic, natural and cultural
resources, etc.)
- Creating additional income sources for the local population
- Creating new jobs and work places
- Increasing the overall direct and indirect financial benefits from tourism activity
More specifically, the ROP operations included under priority 3, are:
3.1 Rehabilitating tourist areas, renovating the historic and cultural patrimony,
protecting / rehabilitating the natural patrimony
This area of operations aims at supporting the capitalization of two important categories
of tourist resources: cultural / historic and natural resources.
Investments in tourism and culture will allow the development regions to use the
advantages of their tourist potential and cultural patrimony in order to identify and

strengthen their own identity, and improve their competitive advantages on sectors with
high added values and a high level of quality and cognitive contents, both on traditional
and on new markets.
The most important opportunities for short term tourism development are those provided
by niche tourism (equestrian tourism, cave tourism, adventure tourism, memorial –
historic tourism, pilgrimage tourism, business tourism etc.), based on natural and cultural
resources, namely: spas, areas of special beauty, including forest areas, natural
protected areas, winter sports areas, historic centres in urban areas etc.
The interventions aim at regaining the internal market, attracting foreign tourists and
increasing incomes from them. This aim will be accomplished by:
- improving the quality of the tourist infrastructure and services
- improving the quality of accommodations
- protecting and preserving the local cultural patrimony
- renovating / refurbishing buildings with traditional architecture, at the same time

as changing their destination (cultural centres, museums)
- developing tourist areas of a special importance, historic city centres with a

significant tourist potential
- developing niche tourism, through activities related to ecotourism, spa tourism,

cultural tourism and, related to this, creating the specific tourist infrastructure
- capitalizing on the tourist development potential existing on a regional/local level,

including cultural and environment values
- turning tourist potential locations into tourist products
- developing a solid market, capable to promote them
When it comes to municipalities that do not have “recognized” historic attractions, these
interventions will support the creation of a tourist identity, that will act as future tourist
attractions.
The historic and cultural tourism is one of the large tourist segments, especially with
respect to the number of guests. In the developed countries, the increase is mainly, but
not exclusively triggered by a considerable economic force, by a demography that
includes the “baby boomers” generation, for whom time availability, good incomes and
personal interest are strongly motivating factors for travels.
In comparison with many other tourist products, cultural and historic tourism may trigger
an economic growth on a large geographic area, through means of communication,
which is more relevant in this context, rather than through concentration on recognized
locations (metropolitan areas, etc). Also, where tourist demand exists, the local
accommodations facilities will be supported, knowing that tourists prefer to find
accommodations in towns and villages that stick to their local traditions and customs, as
compared to tourists who prefer trips and choose camping as a means of spending the
night.
At the same time, it is extremely important to preserve whatever remains from the
cultural heritage of various country regions that have been badly affected in the past
decades, namely historic buildings, monuments, museums, theatres, historic works of
art, and the preservation of folk art and local traditions. These cultural preservation
initiatives, suggested by the local authorities, will be accompanied by a consistent town
and country planning, that preserves (and restore wherever possible) the historic city
surroundings, maintains the traditional architectural style and conserves medieval
historic cities and towns.
In correlation with the objective of infrastructure development, it is important to develop

services that promote tourist attractions and accommodations. Developing private
accommodations, as well as supporting entrepreneurs operating in the small and folk
industry, will contribute to enlarging the number of tourists and to increasing the profits
obtained from tourism. Approximately 42.7% of Romania’s tourism accommodation
capacity is provided by the Black Sea resorts, 16.3% in Bucharest and county capitals
(less Tulcea), 15% in spas, 11.6% in mountain resorts, 0.8 % in the Danube Delta and
12.9 % of beds in other tourist destinations..
On the other hand, the ecotourism, if practiced in a lasting manner, may give birth to
varied activities and allow the enhancement of the environment and economic durability
of the tourist activity, especially in national and natural parks. Considering the fact that
30% of Romania’s surface is mountainous, we believe the mountain tourism is an
opportunity for various tourist activities, some which actually have “niche” characteristics.
International experience in mountain areas that have often been economically, socially
and politically marginalized in their relation with the lower adjacent areas shows that
mountain tourism has always been a source of economic revival. The incomes from
such tourist activities, in certain mountainous countries, have been the main income
sources in foreign currency.
The interventions in natural protected areas and mountain areas may include simple
projects, such as:

- building access roads, marked tourist paths, in certain natural areas of special
beauty
- protecting, preserving and promoting protected natural areas in order to use

them as tourist attractions
- capitalizing on natural resources (building materials, mineral waters, wood)
- construction of natural museums, education centres, tourist information centres

etc.
A lasting tourist use of the protected areas can be achieved through a controlled type of
tourism, namely by a balanced tourist distribution throughout the year (thus diminishing
the effects produced by seasonality). Furthermore, this desideratum will accomplished
by implementing an effective online booking system, that allows an accurate image of
the number of tourists wishing to visit protected areas and a permanent monitoring of
environment pressure.
Park Administration Bodies are the ones who bear the responsibility for these actions,
stressing tourist-attracting areas. Such actions can include specific facilities in order to
support theme tourism activities, such as climbing walls, observation points, etc.
Tourist attraction competitiveness, based on the natural and human patrimony, currently
underused, can also increase substantially. Priority will be granted to initiatives with an
obvious focusing degree, that allow scale economy development, as well as to such
initiatives not over affected by seasonality issues. In order to reduce seasonality-
generated effects to the minimum, the tourist season will be extended by organizing
various events (festivals, seminars, conferences, exhibitions) and by practicing a “low
cost” service policy, attractive for the young and old population, with a greater flexibility
for travelling out of season.
There are various potential candidates for each intervention and the preliminary
investigation of the team of experts shows that the County and Local Councils, the
National Parks Administration as well as private companies are greatly interested in this.
NGOs and other interested entities will be included on the list of beneficiaries if their
projects are relevant for this priority and if they prove they will have a positive impact on
a local and regional level.
3.2 Supporting income-generating tourist activities
This area of operations supports actions aiming at increasing incomes obtained from the
tourist activity. Thus, the following types of interventions can be taken into consideration:

- Developing a more competitive tourist offer (products and services), through the
creation of new products, the improvement of existing ones, modernizations,
quality enhancement, quality certificates, etc.
- Diversifying domestic tourist offers
- Improving business activities, based on common services (shared services),

training in order to improve tourism management skills (immediately solving
complaints / grievances), etc.
- Qualifying human resources in the tourism field (providing services,

entrepreneurship and information technology)
- Supporting innovations and entrepreneurship in tourism companies
- Improving/enhancing the quality of the available facilities and services
- Creating communication networks
- Promotional activities for tourist products and services provided for a certain
destination, and tourist attractions for a specific tourism activity (“niche”) or for a
group of activities, including by organizing international fairs, seminars,
conferences, exhibitions as well as partnership activities for promoting all of the
above.
- Creating specialized tourist activity types (“theme” or ”niche” tourism)
- Creating new work places that affect the rate of employment (request new skills,
training for the unemployed in order to find them jobs in the tourism sector,
training for employees of tourism companies, in order to help them acquire new
skills
Within these intervention fields, it is such interventions that aim at enhancing the quality
of tourist products that will be eligible, in order to support companies and partnerships
creating product and service “packages” and an innovative approach, with a view to
developing more competitive products. We will also support the creation of promotion
networks for locale / cluster tourist areas.
At the same time, we will support the development of new tourist products, especially
those aiming at market niches, integrated development with huge impact on the tourist
destination. The aim of this intervention will bring about the creation of new products,
new work places requesting specific skills (guides for visiting caves, qualified spa staff)
and the revival of areas with low economic activities.

No regional partnerships have yet been formally established with respect to tourism
development and promotion; this type of intervention should support the creation of such
partnerships on a regional level, that help implement specific tourism promotion and
development activities.
ROP priority 3 will also support such interventions / actions aiming at preparing
promotional actions and materials for the niche specific, which applies only to a specific
region or area. Moreover, these interventions will be approved only if they help or are
complementary to the national promotion strategy concerning market niche segments
selected in the regions.
Also, it will support the creation of such types of services provided by tourism business
support structures (technology, development initiatives, financial and legal support), in
order to satisfy the needs of regional and local SMEs.
The development of the tourist product market may include information and
communication technology promotion activities in the tourism business operation field,
and their efficient use in tourism businesses.
The interventions can also support direct actions for the development of human
resources in the tourism field.
Specialized activities may also be eligible for assistance, such as creating the basic
infrastructure (camping, facilities on river beaches), product quality enhancement
(creating and operating a specific quality certification system), and promoting tourist
activities both on a regional and national level.
Specific targets
(2010) (2013)
Implementation
Improvement/upgrading
of available facilities 40 80
(individual facilities)
Activity plans for
promotion of tourism 8 16
destinations / areas
Valorisation of existing
or un-realized touristic
8 16
resources (new
resources)
61

Development of
integrated tourism 4 8
projects
Protection and
maintenance of local
24 48
cultural heritage (sites
or monuments)
Support facilities in
12 20
existing resort areas
Results
Increased visitations in
specific sites / In 40 attractions 80
attractions
Increased visitors per
+3% +7.5%
region (arrivals)
Increase in arrivals +2% +5%
Increase in bed nights +1% +3%
Increase of touristic
visits in nature areas –
nature and national 5% 10%
parks and biosphere
reserves
Impact
114978 jobs
Increase in employment
1.2% of total tourism +0.10% +0.25%
n the tourism industry
employment
Training of un-
employed for work in 200 400
the tourism sector
Training of staff of
tourism enterprises to 250 500
upgrade desired skills
Increased overall
revenue from touristic 10% 20%
activity
Increase in GDP T&T industry is at 1.3%
+0,05% +0,10%
contribution of GDP
Increase in
Government tax
5% 10%
revenue from tourism
industry
Creation of new jobs in 114978 jobs in T + T
+3% +5%
tourism industry industry
Improvement of local
standard of living –
increase in per capita
1% 2%
income of Region (as a
result of tourism
activity)

Public Expenditure
2013.
3.4 Priority 4: Support for urban development

Priority 4 of the ROP is expanding with actions related to the fourth NDP 2007-2013
regional development priority objective, but also to the fifth and sixth objectives of the
same priority. It is also in line with the first and fourth priorities of the Community
strategic guidelines.
It replies to the real needs of the Romanian regions in revitalizing their urban centers,
where, according to the World Bank, is concentrated 53% of the population (data 2003).
These areas, as most of the European cities have several similar problems and the
solution needs several actions.
Most of the regional differences are in the counties, towns or communes. The counties
affected by the processes of industrial restructuring suffer the most serious problems.
For this reason, an integrated intervention in the urban areas is necessary, particularly in
the programs in order to revitalize the local economies and to create new jobs.
As it has been shown in the different stages of planning the integrated approach of the
urban actions has been the most important element to be successful. This means that it
is necessary to combine the means related to the physical renovation of the urban
environment, the adaptation of the basic infrastructures towards the new economic,
social-demographic and environmental situations with action of economic promotion,
social integration, education and professional skills, cultural and environmental
protection. As well, the horizontal targets of gender mainstreaming and sustainability are
the main element in these actions.
In order to get a sustainable urban development investment possibilities must be eligible,

realistic and flexible to allow the intervention in all the fields of the urban problems:
synergies among employment, economic development and competitiveness,
environmental protection, integration of ethnic groups (remember that in Romania the
following ethnic groups exist: 89.1 percent Romanian, 7.8 percent Hungarian, 1.5
percent German, 1.6 percent Ukrainian, Serb, Croat, Russian, Turk and Gipsy) and
physical revitalization of urban environment.
The urban aspect focused on the local level as it is the closest to the everyday problems
of the cities and their inhabitants. Nevertheless, all the important national, regional and
local policies should be coordinated vertically and horizontally.
In this sense, three sub priorities have been defined to give ROP flexibility in the action.
First of all, it is necessary to promote integrated actions in the biggest cities of Romania
(cities with more than 250,000 inhabitants) to concentrate the efforts in regenerate and
revitalize specific urban areas of these cities by integrated actions that cause synergic
effects among interventions to give them more visibility.
As well this area of oeprations will cause a regional and national integrating effect by the
geographic distribution of the helps that it will produce. The same philosophy is the base
of the third operation, but in this case it is focused on regeneration and revitalization
towards new activities of Brownfield areas even if these are not concerned by the first
area of oeprations, because this is an important problem in Romania.
Secondly, with the objective of make easier the intervention in the urban areas that are
not included in operations 4.1 and 4.3 the intervention with environmental and social
individual actions is allowed in the cities or urban areas not mentioned before.
The priority 4 of the ROP incorporates the experience from previously implemented
actions of urban regeneration in a number of Romanian towns and the proposed
operations built on the 2000-2006 programming period Urban CI. The rationale of the
priority 4 actions is illustrated in the following diagramme:
ROMANIAN STRATEGIC
DEVELOPMENT VISION (NATIONAL
AND EUROPEAN)
REGIONAL STRATEGIC LOCAL STRATEGIC DEVELOPMENT

DEVELOPMENT VISION VISION
PROJECTS THAT HAVE REGIONAL/

NATIONAL IMPACT
LOCAL PROJECTS, COMPLYING TO

EU NORMS, providing also
TERITORIAL COHESION

Priority 4 of the ROP is fully compatible with the principles stipulated in the European
Spatial development Perspectives that plan to extend urban networks and to improve
cooperation between cities and their adjacent rural areas, as an engine of economic
growth. The strategy emphasizes the role of urban centers as catalysts of economic
growth and creators of work places by improving the basic conditions they can provide to
setting up businesses and solving urban-related problems.
It is also fully compatible with the European Commission document titled “Lasting Urban
Development in the European Union – an Action Framework”62, that defines four
independent objectives: 1) greater prosperity and more numerous work places in the
urban areas, by maximizing the role of cities as economic growth centers; 2) supporting
social integration and renovation of urban areas 3) protecting and improving the urban
environment as a means of improving life quality, of protecting health and local and
global ecosystems (including sustainable transport systems, self-regenerating energy
sources and an effective energy management); 4) creating effective urban and local
management systems
Priority 4 of the ROP aims at supporting integrated interventions in the urban areas, in
order to revitalize the local economies and to create new jobs. The specific objectives of
this priority are:
! To support regeneration and revitalization of selected urban centres, thus

diminishing present disparities among different regions within cities, by integrated
projects, completed in partnership. In order to do so, the local authorities and all
actors involved in urban development should adopt unique, coherent strategies
to solve out social, economic, and environmental problems more and more
frequent in urban agglomerations, thus improving the quality of life in the urban
environment, also by creating favourable conditions to promoting equal
opportunities among men and women.
! To support revitalization of urban centres with a potential for development so as

to enable such centres to act as economic development engines, by developing
urban public infrastructure, improving the public transport urban network and
other modern urban services.
62
Decision No 1411/2001/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on a Community framework for
cooperation to promote sustainable urban development.

! to stop economic decline of certain urban centres affected by industrial
restructuring, that are faced with problems related to adjustment to new activities
and that lost at the same time part of the city-specific functions, by rehabilitating
the in-situ brown areas and preparing them for other types of activities as well as
by supporting the development of basic services and urban utilities.
Actions that will be supported under ROP priority 4, include:
4.1 Support of Integrated projects for urban regeneration
Integrated Urban Regeneration Action Programmes/Projects for distressed urban areas

(“urban action zones”) will be supported. This type of projects will combine the
rehabilitation of obsolete infrastructure with economic growth and employment increase
actions that have a positive impact on the generation of jobs and alternative income
stemming from the diversification of productive activities. Such activities will be
complemented by measures to combat and provide solutions to social exclusion and to
upgrade the quality of the environment. Thus, implementation of such projects will have
a significant impact on the revitalization of the targeted town centres and/or
neighbourhoods63.
The projects will have to include different actions which have a horizontal and
transversal effect on the area’s economic revitalization, on social integration measures,
on equal opportunities and on active environmental policies that merge into the global
and priority objective of a programme that economically and socially regenerates and
revives Romanian urban areas.
63
The Urban Regeneration Action Plans should fulfil specific eligibility criteria to be further decided upon,
such as:
# Low level of/declining economic activities, ending traditional industrial activities and reduced
opportunities of entering the labour market
# High levels of long-term unemployment
# High levels of poverty, visible in low incomes and social exclusion, marginalisation and
insalubrity
# Specific need for urban reclassification and conversion, given the economic and social
difficulties the targeted city areas are facing
# Large number of immigrants and/or refugees, and/or high number of inhabitants belonging to
ethnic and/or minority groups
# Low level of education, low professional skills, significant skill deficiencies of the local
population, and high rate of early school abandonment
# Low sense of security among the citizens, and respectively high levels of delinquency,
criminality, drug abuse and/or violence
# Negative demographic trends
# A destroyed, neglected or deteriorating environment, including declining old historic centres,
derelict land and/or buildings and deteriorating urban and social infrastructures
During the selection process, projects will always be checked as regards their
compliance with Community policies and guidelines, especially regarding public
contracts, environment, equal opportunities, information and publicity.
The final beneficiaries will be urban centres of at least ……inhabitants and the
population coverage of each “urban action zone” should, as a general rule, be at least
….. although this number might be reduced to ….. in duly justified cases.
The main actions will be:
- Completion and/or consolidation of obsolete buildings in order to accommodate

new economic and social activities, rehabilitation of historical, industrial and
cultural heritage, provided that these activities are integrated in the overall urban
regeneration concept, contribute to the creation of long term jobs and as well as
to social cohesion (individual projects may seek alternative sources of financing,
e.g. under the ROP priority 3). In order to satisfy the growing demand in housing,
block-housing areas were build in most cities and towns during the 70’s and 80’s.
These were located either in the centre or in the outskirts of the cities. Regarding
the first situation, in most cases, old buildings, some of great architectural and
cultural importance, had to be demolished in order to make room for the new
ones. As for the second situation, the new available buildings from the outskirts
caused the abandonment of old, central housing which underwent continuous
deteriorating processes for these were occupied by poor immigrant families. This
phenomenon was intensified after the year 1990, as a result of wealthy families’
preference for suburban individual homes.
Also, the role played by the artistic and cultural heritage in attracting investments
and work places openings. The deterioration of a significant part of the country’s
rich urban heritage requires the implementation of methods aimed at its recovery
and preservation. This area of operations focuses on creating and enhancing
tourist, social and economic infrastructures by refurbishing and consolidating
abandoned buildings as well as on diversifying the offer by creating new tourist
products such as conference centres and other similar facilities.
Hotel constructions and tourist companies development are not eligible for
funding under this priority, but under the ROP priority 3.
- Disuse and recovery of derelict sites for new (including mixed) uses; these will be
eligible for funding under this priority only as an integral, inseparable and
indispensable part of the overall urban regeneration activities (similar individual

projects may receive funding under the Environment Sectorial Operational
Programme).
- Demolition of badly deteriorated buildings and/or structures;
- Re-development and reconstruction of urban public infrastructure and utilities.

Certain urban areas have worn out infrastructures that barely satisfy the
population's needs. This lowers the life quality of the inhabitants and discourages
the establishment of businesses and other economic activities. This is clearly
reflected in the old parts of cities, where buildings of great historical, cultural and
artistic value are in a state of abandon. Basic services are also poorly provided
and green spaces are deteriorating: street pavement in poor condition,
incomplete and /or inadequate street lighting, reduced surface of parks and
leisure areas, insufficient waste containers and bike lanes, etc. In these aspects,
cleanup and rehabilitation will be subsidized. Finally, cities should be provided
with suitable facilities for disabled people: ramps, elevators, audible traffic
signals, etc. These special infrastructures are not only needed by directly
targeted groups, they also provide better access for the population in general.
Population life quality in urban centres is also affected by the lack of green
spaces that, according to European laws should consist of a minimum of 5
square meters per inhabitant.
Actions supported in the framework of the above operations, include:
! renovating city streets;
! renovating public spaces and basic infrastructure (pavements, sidewalks,

public lighting, etc.)
! increasing the surfaces of parks, gardens, and other public spaces;
! adequately equipping city centres;
! creating the necessary infrastructure to allow low mobility individuals to access

public buildings, adapting audio and visual information devices for individuals
with hearing problems;
! creating small infrastructure for water treatment, transport and distribution;
! creating adequate infrastructures for preventing, recovering and recycling solid

waste.
- Development of sports facilities and recreational areas. The aim of this

intervention area is to correct current deficiencies related to sports and leisure
facilities and equipment, in order to improve citizens’ health and life quality. The
co-financed activities consist of: facilities for sports games, creating and/or
preserving recreational areas, youth facilities and centres, etc.
- Social infrastructure and equipment. It is the fundamental responsibility of the

public sector to satisfy specific social needs, and therefore it is the responsibility
of national administration units to finance infrastructures meant to satisfy such
needs. Meeting these needs has also proven to be a major source of
employment and life quality enhancement, as well as a real help in achieving
equal opportunities for both men and women, by providing services that help
them combine their professional and family duties: child-care centres and old
people's homes, assistance for disabled and under age individuals, etc. This
priority does not cover sanitation equipment, health centres, hospitals or
laboratories.
The most significant actions funded herem will be focused on child-care centres,
old people's homes, centres providing assistance to disabled individuals.
- This intervention area aims at obtaining investments in information and

communication equipment, as well as at promoting the citizens' effective use of
new technologies. The financed actions will include the development of public
ICT services, such as web sites providing direct and immediate access to
municipal information and/or services, e-commerce promotion etc.
- support to, and nurturing of, business start-ups, commerce, cooperatives, and
business associations in the urban action zones, integrated in the overall urban
regeneration concept, in order to support the effectiveness of the urban
regeneration activities;
- increasing security and preventing crimes, i.e. by involving residents in the

supervision of neighbourhoods, improved street lighting, closed circuit TV
surveillance and counselling on security and protection against crime;
- promotion actions on a local level, for a better implementation of the urban

regeneration programmes;
- experience exchanges and promotion of good practice examples, notably

through networking, as well as project monitoring and evaluation.
Investments in housing are not eligible for funding under the ERDF. However, when
inadequate housing is inseparable from any attempt at effectively addressing urban
development, the programmes should give evidence of additional financial allocations
from the total eligible amount within specific measures, granted from national and/or

local authorities for housing improvement. The programmes should also explain how
housing refurbishment actions are tightly connected with the ERDF-funded activities.
The criteria for selecting ROP-funded projects must take into consideration the following
aspects:
! the existence of plans or programmes on various administrative or territorial

levels, that correspond to the integral development of specific areas or fields
(the Overall Town and Country Plan, the Regional Town and Country Plan and
the Detailed Town and Country Plan);
! the projects must satisfy certain local needs identified by analysis objective
instruments and mechanism;
! its subsequent investment, as well as its management and/or maintenance,

must be technically and economically viable;
! the projects must have a positive impact on the creation of work places and
alternative income sources, and promote equality of chances for both men and
women;
! taking into consideration the economic and social development potential of the
project area;
! the direct impact of the respective investment in achieving the Programme

goals, especially those concerning the rules enforced on a community or
national level.
4.2 Environmental friendly transport infrastructure, related public utilities and

urban public services
4.2.1 Investments enhancing urban mobility through the creation of an efficient public
transport network in cities/towns
Support will be offered to those activities meant to decongestion urban public transport
and to protect the environment as much as possible, thus providing a good city life
quality.
Projects expected within this area of intervention will include:
- Building bus stations, tramways stations, etc, or consolidating the already

existing ones.
- Extending and/or upgrading tramway network and trolley infrastructure

- Replacing the existing public transport fleets with environment-friendly vehicles
- Setting traffic monitoring and control systems to increase traffic flow, to inform in
real time the users of the public transport system also installing passenger
information systems, emergency centres;
- All other initiatives to promote modern urban and commuter transportation

system as for example: introducing a unique ticketing system for all types of
urban public transport; creating pedestrian areas, building high–occupancy
vehicles (HOV) lanes for buses and taxis, …
The beneficiaries of this area of intervention will be the cities and towns Municipalities
and their subordinated public transport companies (RATs64). The projects will be
considered eligible only if they derive from clear, approved and reasonably justified
urban public transport strategies. Criteria for project selection should incorporate the
evolution of the public transport share of the overall transport outcome within the cities
and towns, age of the public vehicles or number of kilometres covered, number
passengers per bus or per line, etc.
4.2.2 Street rehabilitation, replacement of public utilities, especially in historical city

centres (water pipelines, electricity, gas, etc.)
Most Romanian cities and towns are already implementing street rehabilitation
programs. This process needs to be intensified in order to enable the increase in traffic
speed and avoidance of congestions, which will lead to an increase in urban life quality.
Public utilities infrastructure has deteriorated and the water, electricity, gas, phone and
other supplies networks are to be renewed. The worn out central heating facilities
installed some decades ago which now need to be replaced and /or modernized
represent also a rather delicate issue. In this context, it is to be noticed that more and
more cities and towns are trying to finance their replacement with natural gas or LPG
system.
The beneficiaries of this action will be cities and towns Municipalities. Eligible projects
will be only those deriving from and compatible with urban Master Plans (PUG).
4.2.3 Public urban services
- Investments in cultural, sports and leisure amenities and facilities -when it can be
demonstrated that these are targeting a pre-existing market, and therefore may
contribute to local economy enhancement, to long term jobs creation, to social
cohesion consolidation and to life quality improvement in the targeted areas;
64
Local Transport Companies

- Improving and resorting to a creative approach to urban administration, including
e-government applications, methods meant to improve the citizens’ access to
information, active involvement in the policy development and decision-making
process; information campaigns, etc.
- Promotion of and investment in telematic services with respect to the citizens’

access to and efficient use of intelligent traffic control and communication
systems, promotions regarding the use of Internet, etc.
- Development of urban public services and exploitation of the potential of

information companies technologies in order to improve the supply of services of
public interest for citizens and small enterprises.
- Investment in, and support for the use of, information systems for efficient
management of human resources, training and employment opportunities, and
social services such as health care, education, culture etc.
Support of local authorities for know-how and technology transfer from experienced EU
members; studies and assessments regarding the re-organisation and improvement of
public services; database on good practice in urban management and sustainability;
promotion of new and modern urban management structures, including personnel
training; introduction of local sustainability indexes, follow-up of their uses and possible
improvements.
4.3 Rehabilitation of in situ65 brownfield areas for development of new activities
Support for the rehabilitation and redevelopment of unused in situ brownfield areas in
order to promote their conversion and functional adjustment to new uses, including their
mixed use in an urban context66.
This area of operations is aimed at the rehabilitation and recovery of deteriorated urban
spaces that are unused or underutilized, through an integral approach that permits the
conversion of these spaces into new urban centres targeting private investment and an
improved quality of life for area residents.
These areas are usually facing serious environmental problems, but at the same time
they can be exploited for the benefit of the cities and towns, when there is the possibility
65
In situ brownfiel areas contain abandoned insdustrial areas as well as underused/unused plots of land
within cities
66
Brownfield areas rehabilitation/improvement activities which aim at the creation of industrial facilities,
parks, or other facilities exclusively or predominantly industrial, shall not be eligible for financing inside this
measure; these can be funded through the Competitively SOP.

to convert them for other purposes such as public spaces, social centres, sports and/or
educational centres.
Priority will be given to brownfields located in disadvantaged city areas and which
seriously affect urban structure and functions.
In order to become eligible under this action, the targeted areas have to meet a series of
minimal conditions:
! To be located in cities or towns with a population of over….….inhabitants
! To be at least ……hectares wide
! Priority will be given to areas located in historical centres or to those acting as

connectors between functional city or town areas
! The actions taken have to contribute to creating work places, reviving economic
activities and to integrating the targeted area in the surrounding urban structure.
Given its surface area within the municipality, its rehabilitation implies an enormous
technical and financial effort of local authorities. For that reason, this area of operations
will include the drawing up of urban development plans and studies.
Priority will be given to actions focused on the creation of green areas, walking paths,
sports and social or educational facilities, especially for training in the use of new
technologies or for the promotion of environmental activities.
Activities carried out under this area of operations must include actions aimed at
introducing community development and participation.
Housing cannot be subsidized under this action. If the creation of new housing is vital for
the development plan of the area, then it must entirely rely on private funding sources
that will be specified in the development plan.
Projects prioritizing criteria will be: technical quality of the area's development plan,
economic viability, and synergy with other ROP operations, geographic homogeneity,
and the size of the area in relation to the municipality and its population, as well as its
degree of physical deterioration.
Specific targets
(2010) (2013)
67

Implementation
Number of jobs created 200 5.000 10.000
Number of new micro 60 500
companies that are
250
well-established in the
action areas
Population increase of 2 15
7
the action areas (%)
Surface of created / 15.000 80.000
restored public 40.000
buildings (m2)
restored public spaces
200.000
(streets, squares...)
(m2)
Reduction of the crime 25 15
rate in the action areas 20
(%)
restored green spaces
per each 1000
3.000
inhabitants of the action
area (m2/1000
inhabitants)
Number of jobs created 300 1.200 2500
Number of new micro 20 500
companies that well-
250
established in the
action areas
restored public 40.000
buildings (m2)
Surface of created/ 6.000 48.000
restored public spaces
20.000
(streets, squares…)
(m2)
Surface of created / 50 1.000
restored green spaces
per each 1000
500
inhabitants of the action
area (m2/1000
inhabitants)
Results

Impact
Public Expenditure
2013.
3.5 Priority 5: Technical assistance

Technical Assistance is a tool to be used by the Institutions in charge of managing the
Regional Operational Program in order to enhance quality and speed up the coherence
of actions as well as to ensure that the best and most effective use is made of it.
As stated in the Article 44 of the proposal for a COUNCIL REGULATION laying down
general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social
Fund and the Cohesion Fund, presented by the Commission (COM(2004)492 final,
14.7.2004), dedicated to Technical Assistance of the Member states,
“At the initiative of the Member State, for each operational programme, the Funds may
finance preparatory, management, monitoring, evaluation, information and control
activities and activities to reinforce the administrative capacity for implementing the
Funds within the following limits:
a) 4% of the total amount allocated to each operational programme under the

“Convergence” and the “Regional competitiveness and employment” objectives...”.
In order to define the Technical Assistance that will be necessary for the implementation
of the ROP, we take into consideration the proposal for Institutional Arrangements (ROP
Implementation System) included in the Chapter 21 of the acquis communautaire.
According to Governmental Decision No. 402/23.03.2004, the Managing Authority for

Regional Operational Programme is set up within the structures of the Ministry of
European Integration and will be built up from the Directorate General for Regional
Development.

The Intermediate Bodies for the implementation of operations under the Regional
Operational Programme are the eight Regional Development Agencies. Service
contracts regarding the delegation of attributions will be concluded by the ROP
Managing Authority with each RDA for the duration of the programme. The contracts will
include conditions relating to:
- the organisational structure of the IB and separation of functions
- maintenance of adequate levels of trained staff and monitoring of training
- maintenance of network systems
- attainment of a recognised management standard
SWOT analysis for technical assistance
STRENGHTS WEAKNESSES
• Motivated and professional staff in the MA, FB • Some other staff have a lack of skills
and IB concerning EU SF management.
• Partnership already existing between MA, IB • Low salaries of the staff working in MA, IB
and Final Beneficiaries, built during PHARE and FB.
period. • Temporary contracts for the staff: un-
• Some staff already familiar with EU funds stability.
management. • Low capacity for co-financing projects at
• Technical Staff in Municipalities and Judets FB level.
have on the ground information about the local • Low level of knowledge about ROP fields
needs. of interventions.
• Low capacity of some FB for prioritizing
projects.
• RDAs do not provide the right assistance
to FB to allow the to prepare and manage
successful projects.
• There is not enough awareness of EU
possible assistance for Regionl
Development in Romania.
OPPORTUNITIES THREATS
• TA will allow staff to improve skills for EU SF • TA will substitute local capacities for
management. external support, so after ROP no
• Better salaries and work conditions for staff. knowledge will remain in the Final
• TA will improve awareness and knowledge Beneficiaries and IB.
about regional development and the role of EU. • Instead of partnership there could be a
• TA will help to develop and reinforce the conflict between MA, IB anf FB if the role
already existing partnership at regional level. and competences of each stakeholder are
• ROP will help to empower local capacities for not clear from the beginning.
regional development • Un-correct use of TA will mean a deficient
pipeline of projects, and the risk to lose
EU financial assistance.

Objectives of the priority 5 (Technical Assistance)
5.1 Support for the implementation and overall management of the ROP
To make available the staff, the media (IT and office equipment) and the external expert
support necessary for the smooth implementation and overall management of the ROP.
Actions will include :
5.1.1 Support to different phases of the Programme/Project Cycle Management

including preparation selection, internal evaluation, monitoring and control.
Carrying out preparatory, selection, evaluation and monitoring activities arising during
the implementation of the ROP, including the preparation, selection, evaluation and
monitoring of projects. At the same time, costs related to the preparation of a concrete
project, will be eligible under ROP priority 1.3.
At the MA level, special attention will be given to:
• Regional policy formulation
• ROP/PC programming and adjustment.
• Coordination of Annual Implementation Reports
• Coordination of project pipeline building
• Coordination of project application, appraisal, selection, compliance, contracting

& monitoring systems
• Participation in regional project selection committees
• Coordination of Art.4 on the spot checks by IBs
At the IB level , special attention will be given to:
• Guidance to beneficiaries
• Regional project pipeline development
• Project appraisal & selection (Activity to be done by external experts contracted

by the MA)
• EC policy compliance check
• Advice to Final Beneficiaries for public Contracting
• Management Information System data entry
• Project monitoring – Art. 4 on the spot checks

5.1.2 Support to ROP Monitoring Committees and Regional Coordination
Committees regarding all what is related to the organisation and logistics
The Monitoring Committee for the ROP as well as the Regional Coordination
Committees will be based on the current structures, existing in the pre-accession phase,
respectively the National Board for Regional Development (NBRD) and Regional
Development Boards (RDBs – established in each of the eight development regions),
although with modified membership.
The following costs of the Monitoring Committee and the Regional Coordination
Committees will be covered by TA:
• At the MA level the secretariat role of the Monitoring Committees.
• Organisation of meetings,
• Translation and interpretation.
• Covering costs related to the meetings (e.g. costs of transport, accommodation

and daily allowances),
• Preparation and copying of documents of the Monitoring Committee and Project

Selection Committee,
• Documentation of meetings
• Keeping continuous contact with members of the Monitoring Committee and

Project Selection Committee
• Support for consultation activities assisting the work of the Monitoring Committee
and Project Selection Committee
5.1.3 IT monitoring and control management systems ensuring interrelation

between MA and the Commission together with IB.
A Management Information System (MIS) will be the key tool in the implementation
system for the ROP and for the electronic transfer of data with the European
Commission. Currently, an electronic system of exchanging data and information is
existing within the eight Regional Development Agencies for monitoring the Phare ESC
Projects. The respective ROP MIS will be a comprehensive system, under which the
contracting, implementation and physical and financial monitoring of ROP will be safely
and timely achieved.
At the IB level, special importance will be given to:
• Authorized structured regional data collection

• Contribution to ROP programming and monitoring
• Reporting capabilities at all authorized user levels
• Regional contribution to the existing Ministry’s of Public Finance MIS
• Automated transferring of data/information to the European Commission
5.1.4 Improvement and use of evaluation methods including ex-ante, mid-term,

ex-post and final evaluations exercises. External evaluation.
As stated in the Article 45.4 of the proposal for a COUNCIL REGULATION laying down
general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social
Fund and the Cohesion Fund, presented by the Commission (COM(2004)492 final,
14.7.2004), “Evaluations shall be financed from the budget for technical assistance”.
External evaluation will be contracted by the MA.
5.1.5 Support to MA and payment Authorities for tasks related to audit, interim
control and other expenditures required to improve process and functioning
The MA will be responsible for the activities of Internal Audit and Financial Management
and Control. There will be a clear separation of both functions.
At the level of MA, special attention will be given to:
• Concerning internal audit: Systems audit of MA and IBs and Undertaking Art. 10 -
5% checks.
• Concerning financial control: Audit trail & ex-ante financial control procedures
and Certification of expenditure incurred at programme level.
• Concerning Liaison with Paying Authority: Transmission of payment requests to

PA, Reporting irregularities, Recovery of sums wrongly paid out, Implementation
of financial corrections.
At the level of IB, special attention will be given to:
• Concerning internal audit: Internal Audit of IB management systems, Audit of

final beneficiaries’ grant management systems, checking adequacy of final
beneficiaries’ systems to audit final payment claims.
• Concerning financial control: Ex-ante control and check of financial aspects of

contracts, Maintenance of audit trail, Validation of payment claims & transmission
to MA, Ensuring beneficiaries’ final claims are audited, Reporting irregularities to
MA.

5.1.6 Organisation of seminars and training sessions building skills capacity for
IB/MA staff
Both the Managing Authority and the Intermediate Bodies will need to build their
capacities for personnel management and training in order to meet the new demands in
order to manage the ROP. TA will finance the training program and if necessary
exchange of experiences including study visits to other EU countries.
5.1.7 Improve administration capacity (IT infrastructure)
Acquisition and installation of IT and office infrastructure for ROP management and
monitoring system i.e. computer system for ROP management and implementation and
for information analyses.
5.2 Support to the Communication Strategy of the ROP
Structural Funds Regulation states that the Managing Authority is responsible for
creating awareness on ROP actions, and in particular for informing potential final
beneficiaries, trade and professional bodies, the economic and social partners, bodies
promoting equality between men and women and non-governmental organisations about
the opportunities afforded by the assistance and for informing the general public about
the role played by the Community in the assistance concerned and its results.
Actions will include:
- Information, publicity and dissemination activities targeting public society and

potential beneficiaries regarding possibilities offered by Structural Funds.
- Elaboration of practical guidelines for SF management adapted to Romanian

framework.
- Information materials (Publication of pamphlets, posters, etc.), communication to

beneficiaries, etc.
- Organisation of conferences, professional forums, presentations, road-shows
5.3 Studies and Statistics
To improve the knowledge about the impact of ROP interventions on the Regional
Development, and to analyse specific aspects of the ROP interventions at the regional
and national level.
The ROP will support the following actions:

- Studies which aim at increasing regional stakeholder capacities (IB, final
beneficiaries), linked to the areas of intervention of the current ROP
- Studies linking SOP interventions with respective ROP areas of interventions.

The results of this targeted studies will be used to mature either ROP or SOP
projects
- Studies concerning environmental impacts of the SF interventions in the

Regions.
- Studies concerning the impacts of SF interventions on growth and employment in

the Regions.
- Improvement of regional statistics to ensure the functionality of the ROP

monitoring system.
- Sectoral studies to identify horizontal interventions with comparative advantages

for the regions.
Specific targets
Indicator Baseline Value
(2010) (2013)
Implementation
Number of new staff 62
- 62
hired at MA’s level
Number of new staff 249
- 249
hired at RDA’s level
Number of staff
involved in ROP
- 204 204
management at MA´s
level
Number of staff
involved in ROP
- 415 415
management at RDA´s
level
Number of Monitoring 14
- 7
Committees
Number of Regional 112
Coordination - 56
Committees
Number of projects 750
appraised by external - 300
evaluators

Number of projects 38
- 10
audited (Art. 10)
Number of 200
conferences, - 100
workshops, organised
Number of Staff trained - 7.000 9.500
Number of practical 20.000
- 20.000
guidelines distributed
Number of information
material (pamphlets, - 50.000
100.000
posters, etc.)distributed
Number of studies 120
- 40
performed
Results
Level of satisfaction
about the overall
management of the - High High
ROP among final
beneficiaries (low,
medium, high)
Percentage of staff of
ROP final beneficiaries
(judets, - 35% 70%
municipalties,etc.)
aware of ROP
interventions
Increase of the final
beneficiaries’ level of
knowledge about - Medium High
regional development in
Romania
Impact
Increase percentage of
absorption capacity (in
terms of financial - 50% 100%
performance) of final
beneficiaries.
Public Expenditure
will receive 56 million euro, i.e. 1.62% of the total public expenditure of the ROP 2007-
2013.

4. FINANCING PLAN OF THE ROMANIAN ROP

Financial Table for Operational Programme by priority and year
Commission Reference No Operational Programme:____________________
Title: Regional Operational Programme (ROP) "Regional Development"
(in euro)
Public
Community participation National public participation Other financial
Cohesion EIB
Priority/Year Total Cost Private instruments (to be
Total Other (to be Fund loans
Total ERDF ESF Total Central Regional Local specified)
specified)
Priority 1
2007 72.9446 72.9446 54.7084 54.7084 18.2361 18.2361
2008 105.3644 105.3644 79.0233 79.0233 26.3411 26.3411
2009 153.9941 153.9941 115.4955 115.4955 38.4985 38.4985
2010 178.3089 178.3089 133.7317 133.7317 44.5772 44.5772
2011 332.3030 332.3030 249.2272 249.2272 83.0757 83.0757
2012 413.3525 413.3525 310.0143 310.0143 103.3381 103.3381
2013 364.7228 364.7228 273.5421 273.5421 91.1807 91.1807
Total ERDF related 1,620.9900 1,620.9900 1,215.7425 1,215.7425 405.2475 405.2475
Priority 2
2007 28.3500 28.3500 21.2625 21.2625 7.0875 7.0875
2008 40.9500 40.9500 30.7125 30.7125 10.2375 10.2375
2009 59.8500 59.8500 44.8875 44.8875 14.9625 14.9625
2010 69.3000 69.3000 51.9750 51.9750 17.3250 17.3250
2011 129.1500 129.1500 96.8625 96.8625 32.2875 32.2875
2012 160.6500 160.6500 120.4875 120.4875 40.1625 40.1625
2013 141.7500 141.7500 106.3125 106.3125 35.4375 35.4375
Total ERDF related 630.0000 630.0000 472.5000 472.5000 157.5000 157.5000
Priority 3
2007 12.6000 12.6000 9.4500 9.4500 3.1500 3.1500
2008 18.2000 18.2000 13.6500 13.6500 4.5500 4.5500
2009 26.6000 26.6000 19.9500 19.9500 6.6500 6.6500
2010 30.8000 30.8000 23.1000 23.1000 7.7000 7.7000
2011 57.4000 57.4000 43.0500 43.0500 14.3500 14.3500
2012 71.4000 71.4000 53.5500 53.5500 17.8500 17.8500
2013 63.0000 63.0000 47.2500 47.2500 15.7500 15.7500
Priority 4
2007 39.1500 39.1500 29.3625 29.3625 9.7875 9.7875
2008 56.5500 56.5500 42.4125 42.4125 14.1375 14.1375
2009 82.6500 82.6500 61.9875 61.9875 20.6625 20.6625
2010 95.7000 95.7000 71.7750 71.7750 23.9250 23.9250
2011 178.3500 178.3500 133.7625 133.7625 44.5875 44.5875
2012 221.8500 221.8500 166.3875 166.3875 55.4625 55.4625
2013 195.7500 195.7500 146.8125 146.8125 48.9375 48.9375
Technical assistance
2007 2.5200 2.5200 1.8900 1.8900 0.6300 0.6300
2008 3.6400 3.6400 2.7300 2.7300 0.9100 0.9100
2009 5.3200 5.3200 3.9900 3.9900 1.3300 1.3300
2010 6.1600 6.1600 4.6200 4.6200 1.5400 1.5400
2011 11.4800 11.4800 8.6100 8.6100 2.8700 2.8700
2012 14.2800 14.2800 10.7100 10.7100 3.5700 3.5700
2013 12.6000 12.6000 9.4500 9.4500 3.1500 3.1500
Total 3,456.9900 3,456.9900 2,592.7425 2,592.7425 864.2475 864.2475
Total ERDF related 3,456.9900 3,456.9900 2,592.7425 2,592.7425 864.2475 864.2475

5. COMPLEMENTARITY WITH OTHER SF CO-
FINANCED MEASURES
5.1 Complementarity with other programmes co-

financed by the ERDF and the ESF
5.2 Complementarity with measures co-financed

by the European Agricultural Fund

6. IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE ROP
6.1 Introduction
6.2 Management
6.3 Monitoring and evaluation
6.4 Financial management and control
6.5 Information and Publicity
6. 6 Managem ent I nform ati on S ystem (M IS )

ANNEX 1
Ar eas of oper ation and indicative pr ojects
Draft Regional Operational Programme of Romania – August 2005

ANNEX 2
Global Indicators for ROP 2007-2013

ANNEX 3
Ex-ante evaluation of the ROP 2007-2013

ANNEX 4
Flowchart on financial management and control

ANNEX 5
State aid table

ANNEX 6
Statistical tables & maps

Rop 2005

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Rop 2005

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MINISTRY OF EUROPEAN INTEGRATION

Draft Regional Operational Programme of Romania – August 2005 2

Draft Regional Operational Programme of Romania – August 2005 3

Draft Regional Operational Programme of Romania – August 2005 4

Draft Regional Operational Programme of Romania – August 2005 5

Draft Regional Operational Programme of Romania – August 2005 6

The five Sectoral Operational Programmes (SOP) are:

! Increasing Economic Competitiveness (co-financed by the ERDF)

! Transport Infrastructure (co-financed by the ERDF and the Cohesion Fund)

! Environment Infrastructure (co-financed by the ERDF)

! Human Resources Development (co-financed by the ESF)

! Agriculture, Rural Development and Fisheries (co-financed by the European

Region 1: North–East Region

Region 2: South–East Region

Region 3: South Region

Region 4: South–West Region

Region 5: West Region

Region 6: North–West Region

Region 7: Center Region

Region 8: Bucharest Region

Romanian regions are non-administrative units, without legal personality. Nevertheless,

Draft Regional Operational Programme of Romania – August 2005 7

Draft Regional Operational Programme of Romania – August 2005 8

c) The economic and social partners;

d) Other bodies representing civil society, environmental partners, non-governmental

The ROP framework is structured in four priorities and eleven sub-priorities/areas of

Draft Regional Operational Programme of Romania – August 2005 9

Priority 1: Improvement of regional and local public infrastructure

Priority 2: Strengthening of regional and local economies

Priority 3: Development of regional and local tourism

Priority 4: Support for urban development

Priority 5: Technical Assistance

Draft Regional Operational Programme of Romania – August 2005 10

Draft Regional Operational Programme of Romania – August 2005 11

! County Councils/other regional/local entities (Communal Councils);

! Municipal Councils – urban regeneration packages;

! Local Chambers of Trade and Industry;

Additional bodies will be responsible for creating regional partnerships, particularly in

Management and implementation arrangements for the ROP will be analytically

Draft Regional Operational Programme of Romania – August 2005 12

1.1 Background information

Evolution of GDP per capita

28 GDP per capita

Draft Regional Operational Programme of Romania – August 2005 13

Evolution of employment and unemployment rates

The overall development policy of the Romanian government seeks to enhance

Romania has a diversified economic base:

Structure of production % of Gross Value Added

Source: National Institute for Statistics

Draft Regional Operational Programme of Romania – August 2005 14

From the employment structure of

Draft Regional Operational Programme of Romania – August 2005 15

Major economic sectors’percentage share in total employment by region (204)

Source: National Institute of Statistics, EU Employment observatory

Draft Regional Operational Programme of Romania – August 2005 16

National Board for Regional Development (NBRD)

Regional Development Boards (RDBs)

Draft Regional Operational Programme of Romania – August 2005 18

In particular, Regional Development Boards play an important role in implementing the

! Approving the list of institutions selected to receive assistance at regional level.

Regional Development Agencies (RDAs).

Romanian regions historically present disparities at the level of their economic