Have a personal or library account? Click to login

Territorial fragmentation in post-communist Romania: the not so curious case of a de-amalgamation reform

Miscellanea Geographica
Volume 25 (2021): Issue 1 (January 2021)
By:
Open Access
|Jan 2021

References

  1. Băcanu, PM 2010, ‘Cum ar trebui să arate harta redesenată a României?’ [‘How should Romania’s redrawn map look like?’], România liberă, 11 March. Available from: <https://romanialibera.ro/opinii/interviuri/cum-ar-trebui-sa-arateharta-redesenata-a-romaniei-179771.html>. [28 March 2020].
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  2. Bakk, M & Szász, AZ 2010, ‘Conflict and convergence: Regionalisation plans and autonomy movements in Romania’, European and Regional Studies, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 19–32.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  3. Benedek, J & Bajtalan, H 2015, ‘Recent regionalization discourses and projects in Romania with special focus on the Székelyland’, Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences, vol. 11, no. 44, pp. 23–41.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  4. Bochsler, D & Szöcsik, E 2013, ‘The forbidden fruit of federalism: Evidence from Romania and Slovakia’, West European Politics, vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 426–446.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  5. Brink, A 2004, ‘The break-up of municipalities: Voting behavior in local referenda’, Economics of Governance, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 119–135.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  6. Chen, P 2002, ‘They’re not like us: The de-amalgamation process of Delatite Shire’, Paper proceedings of the Jubilee Conference of the Australian Political Science Association, Canberra, Australian National University. Available from <http://hdl.handle.net/11343/33707>. [28 March 2020].
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  7. Dobre, AM 2009, ‘The dynamics of europeanisation and regionalisation: Regional reform in Romania’, Perspectives on European Politics and Society, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 181–194.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  8. Dollery, B, Kortt, M & Grant, B 2011, ‘A normative model for local government de-amalgamation in Australia’, Australian Journal of Political Science, vol. 46, no. 4, pp. 601–615.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  9. Drew, J & Dollery, B 2014, ‘Separation anxiety: an empirical evaluation of the Australian Sunshine Coast Regional Council de-amalgamation’, Public Money & Management, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 213–220.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  10. Drew, J, Razin, E & Andrews, R 2019, ‘Rhetoric in municipal amalgamations: a comparative analysis’, Local Government Studies, vol. 45, no. 5, pp. 748–767.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  11. Erlingsson, GÓ 2005, ‘Modelling secessions from municipalities’, Scandinavian Political Studies, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 141–159.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  12. Gheorghiță, A 2010, Lideri politici și construcția deciziei de vot [Political leaders and the construction of voting decisions], Institutul European, Iași.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  13. Guvernul României [Government of Romania] 2001a, Hotărâre nr. 455 din 2001 privind aprobarea Planului de acţiune al Programului de guvernare pe perioada 2001-2004 [Decision no. 455 from 2001 approving the Action Plan of the 2001-2004 Governing Programme]. Monitorul Oficial, No. 267, Part I.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  14. Guvernul României [Government of Romania] 2001b, Hotărârea nr. 1006 din 2001 pentru aprobarea Strategiei Guvernului privind accelerarea reformei în administrația publică [Decision no. 1006 from 2001 approving the Government Strategy for the Acceleration of Public Administration Reform]. Monitorul Oficial, No. 660, Part I.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  15. Guvernul României [Government of Romania] 2016, ‘Participarea premierului Dacian Cioloș la cea de-a XIX-a sesiune ordinară a Adunării Generale a Asociaţiei Comunelor din România’ [The participation of prime-minister Dacian Cioloș to the XIXth meeting of the General Assembly of the Association of Communes from Romania]. Available from: <https://gov.ro/ro/stiri/comunicat-de-presa-si-discurs-participareapremierului-dacian-ciolos-la-ev-asociatiei-comunelor-din-romania>. [28 March 2020].
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  16. Hsieh, H-F & Shannon, SE 2005, ‘Three approaches to qualitative content analysis’, Qualitative Health Research, vol. 15, no. 9, pp. 1277–1288.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  17. Iordan, I & Alexandrescu, V 1996, ‘Consideraţii geografice privind reorganizarea administrativă a teritoriului României’ [‘Geogrpahical assessment on the administrative reorganisation of Romanian territory‘], Revista Geografică, no. II–III, pp. 118–121.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  18. Kopric, I 2012, ‘Consolidation, fragmentation, and special statuses of local authorities in Europe’, Croatian & Comparative Public Administration, vol. 12, p. 1175–1196.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  19. Lima, RC de A & Silveira Neto, R da M 2018, ‘Secession of municipalities and economies of scale: Evidence from Brazil’, Journal of Regional Science, vol. 58, no. 1, pp. 159–180.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  20. Maxfield, E 2012, ‘Resistance to change: Romania’s debate over territorial reforms’, Sfera Politicii, vol. 20, no. 167, pp. 12–20.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  21. Miljan, LA & Spicer, Z 2015, De-Amalgamation in Canada: Breaking up is hard to do, Fraser Institute. Available from: <https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/files/de-amalgamation-in-canada.pdf>. [28 March 2020].
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  22. Ministerul Agriculturii și Dezvoltării Rurale [Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development] 2008, ‘Programul Naţional de Dezvoltare Rurală 2007–2013’ [‘National Rural Development Programme 2007–2013’]. Available from: <http://old.madr.ro/pages/dezvoltare_rurala/pndr_versiune_februarie_2008.pdf>. [28 March 2020].
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  23. Nistor, IS 2000, Comuna şi judeţul. Evoluţia istorică [The commune and the county. The historical evolution], Dacia, Cluj-Napoca.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  24. O’Dwyer, C 2006, ‘Reforming regional governance in East Central Europe: Europeanization or domestic politics as usual?’, East European Politics & Societies, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 219–253.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  25. Parlamentul României [Parliament of Romania] 2000, Program de guvernare din 28 decembrie 2000 pe perioada 2001–2004 [Governing Programme from December 28, 2000 for 2001–2004]. Monitorul Oficial, No. 700, Part I.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  26. Parlamentul României [Parliament of Romania] 2001a, Lege nr. 215 din 23 aprilie 2001 a administraţiei publice locale [Law no. 215 from April 23, 2001 on local public administration]. Monitorul Oficial, No. 204, Part I.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  27. Parlamentul României [Parliament of Romania] 2001b, Lege nr. 351 din 6 iulie 2001 privind aprobarea Planului de amenajare a teritoriului național - Secțiunea a IV-a Rețeaua de localități [Law no. 351 from July 6, 2001 approving the National Spatial Plan – Section IV the network of localities]. Monitorul Oficial, No. 408, Part I.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  28. Preda, C 2013, ‘Partide, voturi şi mandate la alegerile din România (1990–2012)’ [‘Parties, votes and seats in Romanian elections (1990–2012)’], Studia Politica. Romanian Political Science Review, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 27–110.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  29. Preda, C & Soare, S 2008, Regimul, partidele și sistemul politic din România [The regime, the parties and the political system of Romania], Nemira, București.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  30. Profiroiu, CM, Profiroiu, AG & Szabo, SR 2017, ‘The decentralization process in Romania’ in The Palgrave Handbook of Decentralisation in Europe, eds JM Ruano & M Profiroiu, Springer, Cham, pp. 353–387.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  31. Profiroiu, CM & Profiroiu, AG 2006, ‘Decentralization process in Romania’, Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences, vol. 2, no. 16, pp. 115–123.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  32. Săgeată, R 2011, ‘Administrative reforms in Romania-between political reasons and geographical realities’, Geograful/The geographer, vol. III, no. 1–2, pp. 3–26.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  33. Săgeată, R 2012, ‘Inter-communal cooperation and regional development: The case of Romania’, Quaestiones Geographicae, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 95–106.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  34. Skaburskis, A 1992, ‘Goals for restructuring local government boundaries: Canadian lessons’, Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 159–172.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  35. Soare, FS 2013, ‘IICCMER – 45 de ani de la ultima reorganizarea administrativ-teritorială a României’ [‘IICCMER – 45 years since Romania’s last administrative-territorial reorganisation’], IICCMER. Available from: <https://www.iiccr.ro/45-de-ani-de-la-ultima-reorganizarea-administrativteritoriala-a-romaniei/>. [28 March 2020].
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  36. de Souza, SV, Dollery, BE & Kortt, MA 2015, ‘De-Amalgamation in action: The Queensland experience’, Public Management Review, vol. 17, no. 10, pp. 1403–1424.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  37. Stănuș, C 2018, ‘The architecture of a complex system: The Oradea metropolitan area in Romania’ in Inter-Municipal Cooperation in Europe: Institutions and Governance, eds F Teles & P Swianiewicz, Springer, Cham, pp. 293–303.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  38. Stănuş, C & Pop, D 2011, ‘Romania’ in The Second Tier of Local Government in Europe: Provinces, Counties, Départements and Landkreise in Comparison, eds H Heinelt & X Bertrana, Routledge, London, pp. 223–241.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  39. Ștefan, L, Grecu, R, Todor, A & Cristescu, R 2004, ‘Local elections 2004: a turning point in Romanian politics’, Romanian Journal of Society and Politics, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 66–126.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  40. Steiner, R, Kaiser, C & Eythórsson, GT 2016, ‘A comparative analysis of amalgamation reforms in selected European countries’ in Local Public Sector Reforms in Times of Crisis: National Trajectories and International Comparisons, eds S Kuhlmann & G Bouckaert, Palgrave Macmillan UK, London, pp. 23–42.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  41. Swianiewicz, P 2010, ‘If territorial fragmentation is a problem, is amalgamation a solution? An East European perspective’, Local Government Studies, vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 183–203.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  42. Swianiewicz, P 2018, ‘If territorial fragmentation is a problem, is amalgamation a solution? – Ten years later’, Local Government Studies, vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 1–10.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  43. Swianiewicz, P 2021, ‘From post-communist democratic laissez-fair to prevention of territorial fragmentation: tightening rules of municipal splits in Central and Eastern Europe after 1990’, Miscellanea Geographica - Regional Studies on Development, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 5–17.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  44. Swianiewicz, P & Łukomska, J 2019, ‘Is small beautiful? The quasi-experimental analysis of the impact of territorial fragmentation on costs in Polish local governments’, Urban Affairs Review, vol. 55, no. 3, pp. 832–855.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  45. Tanguay, GA & Wihry, DF 2008, ‘Voters’ preferences regarding municipal consolidation: Evidence from the Quebec de-merger referenda’, Journal of Urban Affairs, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 325–345.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  46. Tavares, AF 2018, ‘Municipal amalgamations and their effects: a literature review’, Miscellanea Geographica, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 5–15.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  47. Yoder, JA 2003, ‘Decentralisation and regionalisation after communism: Administrative and territorial reform in Poland and the Czech Republic’, Europe-Asia Studies, vol. 55, no. 2, pp. 263–286.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  48. Ziarul de Iași 1998, ‘LNJAD cere înființarea urgentă a județelor abuziv desființate’ [‘LNJAD demands the urgent reinstatement of abusively amalgamated counties’], Ziarul de Iași 4 December. Available from: <https://www.ziaruldeiasi.ro/local/suceava/lnjad-cere-infiintarea-urgentaa-judetelor-abuziv-desfiintate~nil2t>. [28 March 2020].
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/mgrsd-2020-0044 | Journal eISSN: 2084-6118 | Journal ISSN: 0867-6046
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 62 - 70
Submitted on: Apr 29, 2020
Accepted on: Jul 24, 2020
Published on: Jan 29, 2021
Published by: University of Warsaw
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 times per year
Keywords:
Territorial reforms,
de-amalgamation,
local government,
Romania
Related subjects:
Geosciences,
Geography,
Geosciences, other

© 2021 Cristina Stănuș, published by University of Warsaw
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Previous articleVolume 25 (2021): Issue 1 (January 2021)Next article