Decentralization Process in Romania

The Palgrave Handbook of Decentralisation in Europe, 2016

Decentralization does not constitute an end in itself, but a way to deliver more effective public services, a process which tends to achieve a greater degree of administrative and financial independence of the local communities. The local authorities know best the needs and problems faced by the local communities, certainly much better than the central administrative authorities could, are therefore they are in a position that allows them to identify the most appropriate means to satisfy or solve them. The process of decentralization should therefore pursue as an ultimate goal the benefit of the citizen by strengthening the power and role of local public administration in order to ensure the economic and social development of the administrative-territorial units. The transfer of the decision power in the context of decentralization signifies the transfer of the power to decide in the matters of the local community, the power to choose between a number of possible solutions to an existing problem the one considered to be most appropriate, including the power to regulate in certain areas. The transfer of the decisional power must be related to the financial power, for without the insurance of the financial resources in the first place, the decisional responsibility is nothing more then an empty form of decentraization that does not guarantee purposefulness.

2006

The reform of the public administration in the field of decentralization and deconcentration includes three major elements: the further decentralization by transferring the competence and administrative and financial responsibilities to the level of local authorities; the continuation of the deconcentration process by delegating the responsibilities in territory depending on the necessities existing at local level, within the same administrative structure (the deconcentrated services operate at ministry orders that delegated the responsibility); the transformation of the deconcentrated services in territory, depending on the citizens' needs and for making these services efficient, in decentralized services being the responsibility of the local authorities. The updated strategy represents the general framework that provides the premises to continue the decentralization/deconcentration process by providing its coherence. The responsibility to define and implement the sector strate...

Former-socialist countries are generally inertia-driven states, where the change of mentalities progresses very slowly. The tradition of the administrative system of last century still casts shadows over the attempted administrative reform of the present. The paper analyzes the evolution of the Romanian administrative system, since the creation of the first national administrative authorities until today, illustrating in a comparative manner the administrative structures and the various degrees of centralization or decentralization employed. Subsequently, an empirical analysis is performed with respect to the extent of the administrative decisional fragmentation at the regional level in Romania. The question rises if excessive decentralization (to the smallest possible administrative-territorial units) can represent a viable future of public administration, in the context of the European policies, which focus on regional cooperation and coordination. Based on the research concerning administrative fragmentation, the paper will emphasize the relations between centralization, decentralization, cooperation and coordination and their degree of inter-dependency, if any, at the same time attempting to capture the influence of the political factor on the administrative system, its structure and procedures.

Former-socialist countries are generally inertia-driven states, where the change of mentalities progresses very slowly. The tradition of the administrative system of last century still casts shadows over the attempted administrative reform of the present. The paper analyzes the evolution of the Romanian administrative system, since the creation of the first national administrative authorities until today, illustrating in a comparative manner the administrative structures and the various degrees of centralization or decentralization employed. Subsequently, an empirical analysis is performed with respect to the extent of the administrative decisional fragmentation at the regional level in Romania. The question rises if excessive decentralization (to the smallest possible administrative-territorial units) can represent a viable future of public administration, in the context of the European policies, which focus on regional cooperation and coordination. Based on the research concerning administrative fragmentation, the paper will emphasize the relations between centralization, decentralization, cooperation and coordination and their degree of inter-dependency, if any, at the same time attempting to capture the influence of the political factor on the administrative system, its structure and procedures.

2002

The political context of the debate is of great importance for the decision making process in this context. The decision must be the result of a consensus reached at the level of the political class about the necessity of the reform and its main directions, on one hand, and the result of a process of consultation with civil society and other affected or involved groups, on the other hand. At the same time, it is necessary to take into account the recommendations of EU institutions that although do not impose any model can propose viable solutions based on the experience gained in time on different areas. Equally important for the decision-making process must be the previous analysis and documentation, exploration of as many viable alternatives as possible both about the territorial internal divisions and the conception of the responsibilities of the newly created structures. This is exactly the purpose of this study, which insists on the possible delimitation criteria and aspects of financial and public services decentralization. The outcome must be strong autonomous local communities, able to possess the necessary tools and capacity to encourage local development in all its aspects.

The article explores the effects of the decentralization process in Romania as part of the public administration reform, using a set of financial indicators revealing the territorial distribution of the capacity of local public administration to provide public services. These indicators are then correlated with quality of government and government effectiveness indexes at national level. As a result, the analysis reflects a territorial variation of financial independence of administrative units that can be explained by assuming the differences in the institutional set-up of different communities at local level. These results were used further to formulate a perspective on the decentralization process in Romania based on the assumption of non-homogeneity of socio-economic development of different regions in Romania.

The last two decades systemic change has triggered public administration reform in all Central and East European countries, and privatization has served as a prime domestic mover for the structural differentiation of the public sector, this reform contains decentralization of public administration in these countries. The most important general criterion according to which success of a decentralization reform should be assessed is its contribution to the country's democratic transformation and to the social and economic development of the country as a whole, as well as of its individual regions. . Furthermore, fiscal decentralization brings government closer to the people and a representative government works best when it is closer to the people. The economic gains from decentralization of a public administration policy in central and Eastern Europe are macroeconomic stability, equity, efficiency and allocation. Since individual preferences for public goods differ, in a decentralized system individuals choose to live in a community that reflects their preference, which in return maximizes social welfare. Keywords: Decentralization, Public Administration, Central and Eastern Europe

Status Report Decentralisation and Local Public Administration Reform in Moldova, 2021

Today NALAS published the Decentralisation and Local Public Administration Reform in Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine: Learning from the past – preparing for the future and Status Reports on the Progress of Decentralisation Reform in in Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine. The studies aim to consolidate lessons learned over three decades of reform and help the local government associations prepare for the reform next steps in their countries. The publications highlight the main achievements, challenges and opportunities for future reforms in Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine. They aim to support and inform the advocacy efforts of CALM – the Congress of Local Authorities from Moldova, NALAG - the National Association of Local Authorities of Georgia, and AUC – the Association of Ukrainian Cities, vis-à-vis their national and EU level stakeholders; strengthen the position of CALM, NALAG and AUC for intergovernmental dialogue at the national and EU level; support an open intergovernmental dialogue and help build consensus on decentralisation and local government reform in EaP countries and facilitate learning and promote exchange of experiences and lessons learned on decentralisation and local public administration reform. This studies are developed by NALAS, with the support of CEMR - the Council of European Municipalities and Regions, PLATFORMA - the pan-European coalition of local and regional governments and their associations active in decentralised cooperation and the technical assistance and expertise from KDZ – Centre for Public Administration Research. The Status Report builds on the specific country reports prepared in partnership with NALAG, CALM and AUC.

Revista Transilvană de Ştiinţe Administrative, 2002

The issue of public administration reform is an old one for the professional literature. It has always been at the basis of a significant theoretical debate that started with the idea of compatibility between the concepts of “public administration” and “reform”. Central and Eastern European countries have been faced with the acute need of reform after the crash of communist regimes and painful disclosure of the inefficiency of previous bureaucratic models.