mobility management monitors romania 2011 › old_website › docs ›...

Project acronym: EPOMM-PLUS

Project title: Partners Learning Urban Sustainability

Date of preparation: Sept-Oct 2011

Start date of project: 2. June 2009 Duration of project: 36 month

Version: 3

Prepared by: REC Romania

Checked by: Paul Curtis (LEPT)

Verified by:

Status: Final

Dissemination level:

Mobility Management Monitors

Romania 2011

of 28

Table of Contents

1 Basic information ........................................................................................................................................... 5

1.1 Your contact information ........................................................................................................................... 5

1.2 General information on your country ......................................................................................................... 5

1.3 Governance infrastructure for transport and mobility in your country ........................................................ 6

2 Overview of Mobility Management in your country................................................................................... 10

2.1 Does the definition of MM as endorsed by EPOMM reflect how MM is defined in your country? If not,

what are major differences?............................................................................................................................... 10

2.2 Short history of Mobility Management ..................................................................................................... 10

2.3 What are the major strategies for promoting and implementing MM at different governance levels in your

country? ............................................................................................................................................................. 11

2.4 Are there any policies or legislative measures that (indirectly) counteract the promotion of MM? .......... 13

3 Implementation of Mobility Management ................................................................................................... 14

3.1 Overall, how advanced is your country in Mobility Management?........................................................... 14

3.2 How advanced is your country in the following fields of Mobility Management? ..................................... 14

3.3 On which ground/criteria do you base your assessment? Why do you think your country is at level 1, 2, 3

or 4? 14

3.4 Are MM concerns integrated into hard measures?.................................................................................. 15

3.5 How far is MM an objective or an outcome of the land use planning system? ........................................ 15

3.6 Please provide an example of best practice from three different fields of MM. ....................................... 17

3.7 If you have any quantitative indicators on MM measures or activities implemented, please note them

here. 19

3.8 Are the European Structural Funds used to fund MM measures in your country? .................................. 19

3.9 Which other European funding programmes are used in your country to fund MM? Who is using them?

20

3.10 How do you think financing of MM could be improved at all levels? .................................................... 21

3.11 What is public opinion of, and reaction to, MM in your country? What challenges does this present

when implementing MM measures? .................................................................................................................. 22

3.12 What other challenges or problems can you identify with regards to MM in your country?.................. 22

3.13 Other comments .................................................................................................................................. 22

4 Trends and further developments .............................................................................................................. 24

4.1 What is effective in your country in the field of MM? Why? ..................................................................... 24

4.2 Describe MM measures that are successful and will be continued in the future. .................................... 24

4.3 What are the future policies that are being drafted or considered in your country currently? .................. 24

4.4 Which example(s) – in term of policy, strategy or implementation – from other European countries would

you like to see transferred in your country? ....................................................................................................... 25

5 Knowledge infrastructure of MM................................................................................................................. 26

6 Next steps for the Mobility Management Monitors.................................................................................... 28

6.1 Suggestions on the use of MMMs for further dissemination.................................................................... 28

6.2 Improvement of this template for next years ........................................................................................... 28

of 28

1 Basic information

1.1 Your contact information

Name: Magdalena Burlacu, Wioletta Szymanska

Organisation : REC Romania

Tel : +40 21 316 73 44

Email: [email protected] ; [email protected]

Website: romania.rec.org , www.rec.org

1.2 General information on your country

Area: 237.500Km2

Population: 21, 413, 815 (2011, Eurostat)

GDP per capita: €5,700 (2010, Eurostat)

Motorisation: 197 cars/1000 inhabitants (2009), increasing significantly from 136 cars/1000 inhabitants in

2002 (Eurostat)

Road fatalities: In 2009 the number of people killed in road accidents was 2796. In 2008, the child fatality rate

(number of aged <15 killed per number of inhabitants) in Romania was 42 and one of the highest in EU.

(CARE, European Road Accident database)

Modal split∗∗∗∗:

Public

transport

(motor

coaches,

busses and

trolleybusses)

Rail Road (car ,

van or truck)

Walking Cycling Other car (e.g.

car-sharing,)

Other (e.g.

waterways)

Passenger

transport (%

of passenger-

km), 2008

15.2 % 7.6 % 77.2 % N/A N/A N/A N/A

Freight

transport (%

of freight

tonne-km),

2009

N/A 19.4% 60 % N/A N/A N/A 20.6 %

Source: Eurostat Transport Indicators

∗ Detailed instructions available in the guidelines (document attached).

of 28

1.3 Governance infrastructure for transport and mobility in your country

1.3.1 National

Most important institutional roles in the Romanian transport sector are defined by a number of national laws, in

the following three areas:

- Planning and management of transport infrastructure;

- Traffic management;

- Organization/ licensing of public transport operators.

Some of the respective roles/ institutions are detailed below, with the important notes pertaining to the regional

and local levels. The local level of public administration can be further divided in Counties or “Judetz” which

are corresponding to NUTS 3 level in EU and the actual Municipalities/ City Council. The “Regional” level in

Romania corresponds to each of the 8 Development Regions, which are the equivalent of NUTS 2 level in EU

– these regions have only recently been enacted (since 1998) only for the purpose of management of EU

funds, but they don’t have administrative capacities and power in many other respects.

Policy making

The Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure (MTI) is the established body of central public administration

which develops the national policies concerning transport.

The two chambers of Romanian Parliament are involved in the elaboration and adoption of laws for the

Transport sector (e.g. Law no 92/ 2007 on Public Transport Services) proposed by MTI which is the originator

of numerous Governmental Decrees, Ministerial Orders which regulates many specific aspects in the field.

One key national policy for the purpose of this assessment is the Sustainable Transport Strategy for the

periods 2007-2013, and to 2020, 2030, which has been enacted by Ministerial Order 508/ 2008.

Within the MTI, a Management Authority for Sectoral Operational Program (SOP) for Transport has been

established. The SOP Transport represents the strategic planning framework defining the main priorities and

objectives for the sector and national level transport networks development for the 2007-2013 period,

including the main allocating directions of the 5.7 Billion Euro funding from ERDF and CF.

In addition, apart from the responsibilities related to road safety and road infrastructure in the national

transport system, MTI is also responsible for the Bucharest’s metro system and coordination of the

metropolitan public transport network under the new established Bucharest’s Metropolitan Area Transport

Authority.

Secondly, an important role on transport sector policy making is played by the Ministry of Environment and

Forestry who is in charge with the implementation of National Strategy and Action Plan on Climate Change,

including also a priority action chapter towards controlling the GHG emissions from transport activities. The

Ministry of Environment and Forestry is the main player in the policy pertaining to taxation of registered

vehicles in the country.

The third ministry involved in mobility issues is the Ministry of Regional Development and Tourism (MRDT),

responsible for public policies and strategies for territorial, urban and regional development, planning,

legislation and technical regulations, including sustainable mobility and urban transport development policy.

Under the Regional Development Operational Program (POR) and cross-border and international territorial

cooperation programmes, MDRT is supporting many regional and local transport infrastructure construction

and rehabilitation projects funded from ERDF and CF. For the moment 7 of these projects have also

components for intelligent transport systems (ITS).

In addition, The Ministry of Administration and Interior (MAI) has also regulatory and state authority

responsibilities for roads safety and local public transportation management.

of 28

Policy delivery

MTI has a two-fold status: a state authority and a sectoral body, the latter function actually refers to policy

delivery in the field of transport. This function is carried out either directly or through one of the 54

subordinated bodies.

The Management Authority within MTI is the main responsible body for identification and approval of

investment projects under SOP Transport.

MTI is also coordinating the Road Safety Interministerial Council (CISR) which is the main central authority

body responsible for the road safety strategy and policy in Romania.

Financing

The MTI is a primary credit release authority in relation to the state budget and is overseeing the financial

management of projects funded under SOP Transport.

Secondly, another important actor in the funding of transport infrastructure and mobility is the Ministry of

Regional Development and Tourism which hosts the Management Authority of Regional Operational

Programme. Within ROP there are two strategic funding areas (called Priority Axis) of relevance for the MMM.

Under Priority Axis 1 funds are allocated for Supporting sustainable urban development, which gives priority to

rehabilitation of urban infrastructure and improvement of urban services, including transport and mobility,

equipment for communicating to the citizens useful information (interactive digital displays, etc), traffic

management system. Currently under this axis there are projects funded with traffic management components

for municipalities as Hunedoara, Deva, Alexandria and Zalau,

Under Priority Axis 2, funds are allocated for the enhancement of local and regional transport infrastructure.

The ongoing project under this axis including major traffic management tools is for Craiova municipality.

MDRT is also developing another important project funded under ROP axis 4 supporting small businesses

development at local and regional level is a high technology called Traffic Guide covering GPS national

system and information for real time traffic management.

As concerns taxation of car usage, it takes several forms in Romania:

- monthly/ annual tax for driving on national roads, based on the national road tax sticker (rovineta) system;

- the proportional taxation including in the price of fuels;

- first vehicle registration tax.

As defined in law no. 50/2008 the registration tax for vehicles is based on cylinder capacity, emissions on

pollutants and CO2 in compliance with Euro emission standards (hence it is called car pollution tax). The tax

calculation also includes a progressive factor with regard to the age of a vehicle.

The revenues generated under the first two tax mechanisms are ultimately allocated through Ministry of

Transport for national road rehabilitation and maintenance, whereas the last one generates revenues for the

Environmental Fund Administration - AFM. The AFM operates under the Ministry of Environment and provides

subsidies having both positive and negative effects towards MM goals:

- small grants for municipalities to establish new cycling paths;

vouchers for acquisition of new cars based on the adequate dismantling of old ones – the “jalopy” programme

for cars older than 10 years. In summer 2011, the government launched a new Financial State Programme

‘Bicycle paths for bikers’, financed via the Environmental Fund Administration (AFM). This program aims at

constructing new routs and improving the existing ones in cities and communes. Cities can receive approx. 2.5

million RON (cost of approx. 12 km of routes), communes can receive up to 1.5 million RON (cost of approx. 8

km of routes). The total amount of funds available is 50 million RON. As of 9 August 2011, 120 applications

have been submitted to the AFM with the total amount of 2,000,746,826.72 RON.

of 28

1.3.2 Regional

Policy making

As it was already mentioned above the regions have only recently been enacted (since 1998) only for the

purpose of management of EU funds, but they do not have administrative capacities and power in many other

respects. Regional funding is supported by MDRT through 8 regional development agencies and 5 cross-

border regional international cooperation offices located in Oradea, Timisoara, Iasi, Calarasi and Suceava

running programmes between Romania and its neighbouring countries – Hungary, Serbia, Moldova, Ucrainia

and Bulgaria.

Policy delivery

See above.

Financing

Currently the Regional Development Agencies are playing only the Role of Intermediary Bodies in the

implementation of Regional Operational Programme, being involved with project selection and supervision of

implementation.

1.3.3 Local

Policy making

The main responsibilities of Mayors and City Councils in this field comprise:

- elaboration of Transport Master Plans and traffic studies supporting urban and territorial planning

documents for respective cities, metropolitan areas and urban zones. Recently several Transport Master

Plans have been elaborated with Technical Assistance funded by EBRD or ERDF for a limited number of

large cities as Bucharest, Ploiesti, Sibiu, etc ;

- general land use planning and impact assessments needed for construction permits of transport

infrastructure. Regularly all cities need and have an approved city level transportation study or plan of their

administrative territory supporting General and Zonal Urban Development Master Plans. There are already

big cities as Iasi and Brasov developing City Mobility Plans accordingly to SUMP (Sustainable Urban

Mobility Plans) methodology promoted at the European level through the Urban Mobility Action Plan 2009-

2012.

The municipalities are the initiators of local laws, regulations, plans, strategies, and investment projects

related to local and regional transport infrastructure, networks and mobility issues.

Policy delivery

According to Law 92/2007, local public transport, passenger and freight public transport are organized by local

authorities.

Within most of the County Councils in Romania, there are County Transport Authorities. Their role is to ensure

the organization, coordination and control of public transport services for passengers and fright.

Municipalities are responsible for policy delivery and have to make sure that relevant plans are implemented.

They have to make a list of necessary investments and include them in the local budget. Local authorities

have to make sure that they comply with all EU and national standards and policies in force.

Meanwhile for the capital metropolitan area recently a Bucharest’s Metropolitan Transport Authority was

created under the coordination of the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure (GO no.21/2011). Its role is to

elaborate the capital’s metropolitan area mobility policy and to support a sustainable transport system for

of 28

Bucharest City and its surrounding territory. This authority will also license all public transport services in this

area, promoting feasible investments for intermodal transport modes and parking facilities.

Financing

Municipalities are responsible for securing funding for investment, maintenance and operation of public

transport services within cities, whereas bus-lines between cities are leased out to private companies.

The sources of financing of transport infrastructure development and other transport and mobility related

activities come from the following:

- Own budgets of municipalities

- Regional Operational Programmes

- Sectoral Operational Programme (SOP) for Transport

- National Environmental Fund (new source of financing for bicycle paths)

- European projects - FP7, Interreg, IEE etc.

- Private and public support – e.g. cooperation with banks, universities etc.

In principle, municipalities find it difficult to access external sources of financing for planned improvements

mainly because lack of experience and sufficient number of staff.

of 28

2 Overview of Mobility Management in your country

2.1 Does the definition of MM as endorsed by EPOMM reflect how MM is defined in your country? If not, what are major differences?

“Mobility Management” has not yet been absorbed as a technical and official term in Romanian. Regularly the

used term is “Traffic Management” accordingly to the national standards for transport terminology and

elaboration of city transportation studies. Despite the fact that some of its constituting elements – mainly

encouragement of public transport versus personal cars and bicycle use- have been already promoted in the

initiatives of public authorities and NGOs, the “Mobility Management” concept is still brand new in Romania

and relatively difficult to understand by the public, due to its soft-measure focus.

The terminology related to MM has been used as such only in EU-wide projects which involved different

Romanian local authorities as partners. For example at the moment, few Romanian cities participate

in CIVITAS initiative or within the frame of different other EU projects: Bucharest, Ploiesti, Suceava, Craiova,

Iasi, Sibiu, Brasov, Timisoara etc.. More recently the term of ‘mobility’ appeared together with the initiative of

the European Mobility Week, in which Romanian cities are participating as well.

2.2 Short history of Mobility Management

The collapse of Romanian Communist regime resulted in the embracing of free market philosophy and

increase in car ownership along with a lack of long-term planning for the transport sector. Decades after the

totalitarian leader Nicolae Ceausescu introduced some illogical regulations to limit personal cars use for traffic

volume decrease and fuel consumption restrictions (twice per month only cars with even registration plate

numbers were allowed to drive on Sundays followed by the same rule used for the uneven car plate numbers),

so any measure to reduce car traffic received a negative feed-back from the public opinion. Soon after 2000,

however when the growing numbers of cars exceeded the limited circulation and parking capacity in most

large cities, such measures began to make sense again. Especially the lack of parking space has been a

disincentive factor limiting usage of personal cars for short travels within urban and congested central areas of

large cities, but most decision makers (Mayors and City Council members) refuse to consider paid parking

systems as a tool for changing the recent patterns of urban mobility. Instead, they are looking to attract

funding for building multi-level, under ground parking facilities in downtown areas. In addition, in many cities

public transport tickets are offered with discounts or for free to a wide category of users, considered on a

social protection basis: mainly older people, small children and students.

The negative effects generated by car ownership between 2002 to 2008 such as traffic jams are now giving

high priority for political and public media debates (for example the most discussed topic especially around

local elections are on ill-maintained roads, traffic safety and solutions for congested areas), Despite this MM is

not usually regarded as a holistic solution. In addition to that, the car is perceived as a sign of a higher living

and welfare standards and many families posses more than one car or even one car per each family member.

Only in Bucharest and few other large cities the system of flat fares covering all surface public lines in an

integrated and cost-effective manner have been introduced, with an uncertain effect of encouraging public

transport against personal car use. Few Western supermarket and shop chains (Carrefour, Ikea, etc) have

introduced their own minibus routes to enable consumers to reach more remote locations, but these routes

are used mainly by people with no car gaining little modal shift away from cars.

Cycling is now under a growing recognition in Bucharest and other cities, especially since 2006, after more

active environmentalist attitudes were embraced by media celebrities and important political figures

Several biking associations/ NGOs have been established since the 1990s, but they had a limited impact on

local and national level public policy agenda and decision-making process results.

of 28

2.3 What are the major strategies for promoting and implementing MM at different governance levels in your country?

2.3.1 National

Policies

At the moment there is no special national policy nor any document with a specific goal of promoting and

implementing MM in Romania, as the concept of MM has not penetrated the national decision-making level.

National measures and policies referring to sustainable urban mobility are the following:

The National Sustainable Development Strategy Romania 2013-2020-2030 was approved by the Romanian

government 12 November 2008. The strategy aims to ensure that transport systems meet society’s economic,

social and environmental needs whilst minimizing their undesirable impacts on the economy, society and the

environment.

The National Development Plan 2007-2013 is the key document for strategic planning and multi-annual

financial programming designed to give a sense of direction to national economic and social development, in

agreement with the principles of the EU Cohesion Policy. The Plan sets as a general objective the fastest

possible reduction of socio-economic disparities between Romania and the other EU Member States and

details the specific objectives of this process along 6 priority lines of action that integrate, directly or indirectly,

the demands of sustainable development for the short and medium term.

The National Strategic Reference Framework 2007- 2013, accepted by the European Commission on 25 June

2007, sets the priorities for the application of the EU Structural Intervention Instruments (the European Fund

for Regional Development, the European Social Fund and the Cohesion Fund) and links the priorities of the

National Development Plan 2007-2013 to those of the EU as established by the Community Strategic

Guidelines on Cohesion 2007-2013 and the revised Lisbon Strategy.

The Operational Programme “Transport’ 2007-2013” represents one of the ways to ensure the implementation

of the objectives established by law as early as 2003 designing to develop and upgrade the national and

European transport network for keeping with Romania’s commitments in this sector and with the National

Strategy for Sustainable Transport for 2007-2013, including projections to 2020 and 2030.

The Sustainable Transport Strategy for the period of 2007-2013, and 2020, 2030 perspective, sets the

national priorities for development of a transport sector referring to the EC Transport White Paper 2020-2050

(adopted 2011). The general objective of the strategy is to achieve the sustainable development of the

national transport system, which will assure the modern and sustainable transport infrastructure and services

level, sustainable economical development and improvement of the quality of life.

The Environmental Fund has financed in 2007-2008 several projects for construction of new bike routes. As it

was already mentioned earlier in the section 1.3.1 the new Financial State Program ‘Bicycle paths for bikers’,

financed via the Environmental Fund Administration (AFM) has been launched in 2011.

Action programmes

Adaptation of a limited number of trains/ coaches to enable boarding of bicycles was done. .

Legislative measures (incl. taxes)

There are Urban Transport Technical Standards, Norms and Regulations related to transport and

infrastructure in Romanian legislation, but these are outdated and need further amendments to bring them at

the European level standards and best practices. The examples of such legislative measures are the

following:

- Norms and Standards for elaboration of Transportation Studies for cities and their territory of influence

(1993)

of 28

- Technical Norms for Planning and Design of Streets, Crossroads, Bicycle lanes and pedestrian

sidewalks, Traffic Capacity Evaluation, Lights and Signals, Public Transport Networks planning,,

Parking, and Garages Construction Standards and norms (1993 – 2000)

- Technical Directions for traffic census and surveys (1993)

Therefore, at the moment there are no legislative measures strictly encouraging the MM in Romania.

Promotion & awareness

Romania is an active member of the European Mobility Week campaign and the appointed national

coordinator is the National Environmental Protection Agency.

2.3.2 Regional

Policies

The Regional Operational Programme 2007-2013 is a programme that implements important elements of the

National Strategy of Regional Development of the National Development Plan, contributing, together with the

other sectoral programmes, to the accomplishment of the general objective of the National Regional

Development Strategy, mainly for reducing the disparities between Romania’s regions. For the period 2007-

2013, the regional programme is financed from the State Budget and co-financed from the European Regional

Development Fund, one of the EU Structural Funds.

Under Priority Axis 1 - Supporting sustainable development of urban growth poles - the integrated urban

development plans may be implemented by projects addressing rehabilitation of the urban infrastructure and

improvement of urban services, including urban transport. Due to the increasing traffic in towns and cities of

Romania it is important to finance investments in urban public transport as well as the use of alternative forms

of transport like cycling, walking etc.

Action programmes

At the moment there are no action programmes supporting MM at the regional level.


At the moment there are no legislative measures supporting MM at the regional level.


At the moment there are no promotion and awareness programmes supporting MM at the regional level.

2.3.3 Local

Policies

As it was already mentioned, it is a responsibility of local authorities to provide transport services and to

assure the mobility of their inhabitants. There are no specific plans related to mobility management prepared

and implemented. However each Romanian municipality elaborates and implements a Plan for Sustainable

Development, which contains a section treating the sustainable urban transport within the city and its

administrative territory. In addition, transport and mobility aspects are sometimes covered in the urban

development plans and land use plans or under CO2 reduction strategies.

of 28

Transport Master Plans have been developed recently for several large Municipalities (Sibiu, Ploiesti,

Bucharest etc.), which should include measures related to MM. However for example, in the Transport Master

Plan for Bucharest (adopted in 2008) more attention is paid at increasing the capacity of streets, increasing

the number of public transport lines and other hard measures. There are also some initiatives related to park

and ride schemes included, but it is hard to find description of soft measures related to sustainable urban

mobility or MM in this document.

Action programmes

No specific programmes on MM were identified at the local level, however MM related measures are often a

part of other urban action programmes in many cities. For example as of September 2011, 32 Romanian cities

were signatories of the Covenant of Mayors. All of them have voluntary committed to meet the EU 20% CO2

reduction objective through increased energy efficiency and development of renewable energy sources and 8

out of them have submitted their Sustainable Energy Action Plans. Many of them consider implementation of

MM measures as a way to achieve their goals set in their plans and they show interest in MM or sustainable

transport related initiatives and tools.



Actions on promotion and awareness are seen as a local level activity and cities are quite active in that

respect. In several cities there are campaigns for car restricted days and zones, mostly related to the

measures taken under EU projects and other initiatives (e.g. CIVITAS initiative, European Mobility Week, etc.).

In 2011, 47 cities participated in EMW, many of them fulfilling all three types of criteria for participation as

stated in European Charter.

In addition, NGOs organize awareness campaigns to stimulate public transport and biking use / healthy

lifestyle and other long term projects in cooperation with a private sector and state institutes (e.g. free biking

rental services provided in cooperation with Raiffeisen Bank, universities and municipalities (see more details

in section 3.6).

2.4 Are there any policies or legislative measures that (indirectly) counteract the promotion of MM?

As already mentioned, in recent years Romania has adopted a decision to subsidize the scrapping of used

cars older than 10 years from the Environmental Fund to purchase a new car. It is called a ”jalopy". The

adoption of Emergence Ordinance no. 99/2004 and law no. 72/ 2005 was a first step to call in 15,000 vehicles

used more than 12 years. The owners of these cars were paid 3,000 LEI to give up their old cars, providing

that they purchase a new vehicle from producers and authorised dealers. The total amount for this programme

was 45,000,000 LEI. The programme was prolonged on an annual base with a great show of interest from

citizens. In September 2010 almost 87% of the annual budget of the programme was exhausted (annual

incentive programme 2010 with a budget of 722 million LEI to decommissioning of 190,000 vehicles older than

10 years; single voucher value with a nominal value of 3,800 LEI). In fact this initiative can be perceived as

using of the Environmental Fund for part-sponsoring the purchase of new cars despite their negative impact

on waste management (implementation of End of Life Vehicles Directive in Romania). Also it encourages the

purchase of new cars, rather than promoting other, alternative modes of transport and MM measures.

It is very important to notice, that the fragmentation of the responsibilities related to MM in Romania between

several central authorities i.e. different ministries and other units has rather negative impact on promotion of

MM, as there is no single unit responsible for MM policy measures and their implementation at the national

level.

of 28

3 Implementation of Mobility Management

3.1 Overall, how advanced is your country in Mobility Management?

Level 1 No or hardly any activities, save some isolated initiatives

Level 2 Some successes, some funding, several initiatives started X

Level 3 Several successes, structural funding, but no standard practise

Level 4 Solid position, structural funding and standard practise

3.2 How advanced is your country in the following fields of Mobility Management?

Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4

Mobility centres X

Intermodal & multimodal mobility X

MM in companies (mobility consultancy, travel plans) X

MM in public administrations X

MM in schools X

MM for events & in tourism X

Awareness campaigns X

Carsharing & Carpooling X

MM and land use planning X

Other, please specify (bike sharing – see section 3.6) X

3.3 On which ground/criteria do you base your assessment? Why do you think your country is at level 1, 2, 3 or 4?

OverallMobility Management is not very advanced in Romania, however there are some successes, some

funding, and several initiatives started, but these happen mostly at local level. As it was already mentioned the

concept of MM is not well known and recognised and it has not yet been absorbed into national policies. There

is a lack of national policy promoting of MM concept and lack of one single institutional body responsible for

MM in Romania, indicating that MM is not a national priority yet. The concept is not realy promoted and

implemented at the national and regional level.

Some sucessful initiatives started at the local level though, where several municipalities are able to access

European funding directly and get involved in the national campaings such as EMW. Cities are facing

problems with very fast motorisation and mobility rates resulting in a poor air quality and less common urban

space. Many of them have understood that using MM meaures can help them to overcome these problems,

therefore several initiatives started at the local level. Many Romanian cities take part in European projects and

initiatives, however this refers to bigger cities having more mobility and air quality problems but this initiatives

do not involve medium and small cities. Large cities posses also more technical capacity and staff to get

involved at European level. When looking at the type of MM activities, it seems that awareness campaigns are

the most implemented initiative at the local level.

of 28

Unforutunately at the national level there are hardly any initiatives which could be identified as promoting MM

concept and measures.

3.4 Are MM concerns integrated into hard measures?

At a general definition level, some MM elements – improvement of public transport services, inter-modal

facilities, establishment of new biking routes have been incorporated in the design of ROP – Priority Axis 1,

e.g. in the applicant guidelines.

The goal of ROP is supporting a balanced sustainable social-economic development of Romanian regions

according to specific resources and needs by concentration on urban development growth poles,

infrastructures improvement, living environment and businesses development offering more attractive cities

and regions for people, and investors. ROP focuses on the following priority areas:

- Supporting city sustainable development mainly for urban development growth poles

- Improvement of regional and local transport infrastructure

- Social infrastructure improvement

- Supporting regional and local businesses welfare

- Sustainable development and tourism promotion

- Technical Assistance

However, these measures seem insufficient for promoting MM and therefore cannot help integrating broadly

the concept with other local development priorities. At the moment, the priority is still given to big infrastructure

(hard) projects and little attention is given to soft measures, especially in relation to MM. Some actions

towards integration of MM aspects into policies and programmes are visible at local level in some cities,

especially those which are partners involved into EU projects, the CIVITAS Cities and those participating in

EMW events.

3.5 How far is MM an objective or an outcome of the land use planning system?

MM is not sufficiently considered as either an objective or an outcome of land use planning at any of the

planning levels due to the lack of attention given to soft measures in a period where priority is given to a rapid

increase of EU Structural and Cohesion Funds absorption towards investments in infrastructure rehabilitation

and new developments. It is also due to increased supply-oriented thinking (larger roads, more parking

spaces) in solving current car congestion problems. The exception could be the cities involved in EU projects

and initiatives, where several CIVITAS measures have been successfully implemented and thus could have

affected the local approach of urban sustainable development planning.

Planning System

The context for urban development planning in Romania refers to the national, regional and local policies

including also to the social-economic situation of urban areas within the national and international perspective.

General legal framework regarding planning

General Planning Legislation comprises the following:

- Law no.350/2001 regarding urban and territorial planning (updated by Law no. 162/2011);

- Governmental Ordinance no. 525/1996 regarding General Urban Development Regulations (updated by

GO no. 490/2010);

- Law no. 363/2006 regarding National Territory Spatial Development Plan;

of 28

- (SDNP/PATN) - Section 1. Transport Networks updating Law no. 363/2006;

- Law no. 82/1998 regarding roads legal status.

Law No. 350/2001 regarding regional and urban planning establishes the framework for planning matters

relevant to urban areas and real property development. Similar to other countries, Romania manages its land

planning through several levels of zoning plans and regulations. More specifically, there are three such levels:

- General Urbanism Plans and accompanying local regulation (“Plan Urbanistic General - PUG”);

- Zonal Urbanism Plans and accompanying local regulations (“Plan Urbanistic Zonal - PUZ”); and

- Detailed Urbanism Plans (“Plan Urbanistic PUD”).

The “PUG”

A PUG is the most general of the three plans and covers an entire region. It must be updated every 5-10

years, as it contains the policy objectives and legal authority for the achievement of specific development

programs. A PUG governs:

- settlement and delimitation of land inside city limits;

- how this land is used;

- correlation of functional zoning with traffic planning;

- public easements;

- development and modernization of technical and residential infrastructure;

- protected zones and protection of historical monuments;

- forms of ownership and transfer of land;

- limits on maximum built area, lay-out and green space;

- future local development;

- future regional development; and

- traffic corridors and equipment provided for in the national, zonal and county plans.

A PUG is approved by municipal councils, after obtaining the mandatory technical permits (Rom: avize)

required by law from the Ministry of Regional Development and Tourism (only for the central area of the

municipalities resorts and protected areas), County/Municipal Council and other applicable central and

regional authorities. The plans are publicized within 5 business days of notifying them to the relevant Prefect.

Amendments to finalized plans are subject to the same procedure as described in the preceding paragraph.

The “PUZ”

A PUZ is more detailed than a PUG and applies to neighbourhoods or larger plots of land in which a real

estate project is located. A PUZ regulates:

- organization of roads;

- architectural character;

- land use;

- utilities and infrastructure development;

- forms of ownership and transfer of land;

- protection of historical monuments and easements in protected zones.

A PUZ is prepared by the municipality or an interested investor. A PUZ is approved by municipal councils,

after obtaining the mandatory technical permits required by law from the Ministry of Regional Development

and Tourism (only for the central area of the municipalities resorts and protected areas), County/Municipal

Council and other applicable central and regional authorities. The plans are publicized within 5 business days

of notifying them to the relevant Prefect. Amendments to finalized plans are subject to the same procedure as

described in the preceding paragraph.

The “PUD”

of 28

A PUD is a special regulation with respect to specific parcels of land (as opposed to the wider

neighbourhood). It covers, within the context of its neighbours:

- accessibility and connection to infrastructure;

- limits on maximum built area and layout, as well as derogations there from;

- functional and aesthetic compatibility within areas;

- functional compatibility and conformity of layout and green spaces;

- permitted forms of ownership and transfer of land.

A PUD is prepared only for detailed implementation of a PUG and a PUZ or, at the request of a landowner, for

establishing conditions for new constructions.

A PUD is approved by municipal councils, after obtaining the mandatory technical permits (Rom: avize)

required by law from the Ministry of Regional Development and Tourism (only for the central area of the

municipalities resorts and protected areas), County/Municipal Council and other applicable central and

regional authorities. The plans are publicized within 5 business days of notifying them to the relevant Prefect.

Revocation / appeals

As a general principle of Romanian administrative law, an administrative act may be revoked by the same

body that made the initial decision. A legal action challenging an administrative act must generally be initiated

within a 30-day period. After passage of such period of time, the administrative act may no longer be

challenged by this procedure. However, in case of fraud or an administrative error, an administrative decision

may be rescinded regardless of the time period.

3.6 Please provide an example of best practice from three different fields of MM.

1 Field: Awareness

campaigns

Is this example already available in the ELTIS/EPOMM format? Yes

Social Walking Bus in Sebes

Sebes is a small sized city with easily walkable distances, but which is suffocated by motorized

transport. Very popular some decades ago, walking and cycling were slowly abandoned mainly

because of fear induced by freight transport transiting the city.

Organised within the framework of the ATN Urbact project, the Walking Bus, implemented in May-June

2011, aimed to change attitudes towards active travel, generating a shift from car to walking.

Sebes municipality, together with ATU and with the full support of teachers and local police, conceived

the Walking Bus exercise. The idea was introduced by representatives of schools in the municipality at

the Sustainable Urban Mobility Local Support Group meeting on 17 February 2011. Everyone received

the idea well, with some teachers showing more availability and willingness to carry out action than

others. Safe routes to school were identified and marked by the organisers, with the help of teachers

and parents. Participating children and guides were trained concerning traffic rules. There were 6 WB

sessions organised in 3 consecutive weeks at the end of May and beginning of June, starting from 2

different points in the city and totalling 60 pupils.

The WB registered a real success in Sebes, exceeding initial expectations especially regarding the

unforeseen variety of social benefits. Together with its associated sustainable mobility implications, the

event produced an important change of attitude concerning everyday travel choices.

More details can be found at www.eltis.org

2 Field: Cycling Is this example already available in the ELTIS/EPOMM format? No

Velo map of Bucharest

Two NGOs prepared a comprehensive map of Bucharest including major points of interest for cycling,

such as: shops, bicycle lanes, parking spaces, organizations, vulcanization centres, renting places,

of 28

useful recommendations, etc.

The map is constantly updated in Romanian and English languages available at: www.hartavelo.ro and

www.velomap.ro. The map is a central element of the program “Biking to work/biking to school/ biking

to shop”, whose aim is to encourage the utilization of the bike in all daily activities, as a solution to

losing time, money, energy, space, patience and freedom provoked by the traffic. The next step of the

NGOs will be to find financing to print the map and distribute it freely to interested users.

3 Field: MM and travel

consultancy

Is this example already available in the ELTIS/EPOMM format? No

Travel information telephone service in Iasi, Romania

Prior to the measure there was no easy way for passengers to access information on public transport before or during their journey in Iasi. This lack of knowledge acted as a barrier to public transport use. The 'telverde' service addressed this problem.

Iasi aimed to improve the quality and reliability of their public transport services through a dedicated ‘telverde’ telephone service. This service chose the optimal travel route, which could include using several different transport vehicles, for passengers, ultimately aiming to:

- Provide information and promote the public transport travel plan measures; and

- Increase the quality of transport service to all citizens.

A telephone line was implemented that connects citizens with a dispatching centre, which offers information about the available transport plans.

In February 2010, the public transport company PTI established a “telverde” telephone line that connects citizens with a public transport dispatching centre, offering information about public transport services. The measure has been completed.

Data is being collected for this measure on:

- Number of calls made to the service; and

- Nature of the questions and comments.

This measure was implemented within the CIVITAS ARCHIMEDES project (2008-2012 ).

More info at http://www.civitas-initiative.org

4 Field: Bike sharing Is this example already available in the ELTIS/EPOMM format? No

La Pedale – bike sharing in Sector 1, Bucharest

In 2010 the second edition of the initiative La Pedale took place in Bucharest. For the period April-

October two free bike renting places (in parc Herastrau and in parc Kiseleff) were open daily between

11.00-19.00.

250 green bicycles were available for renting for the maximum time of 2 hours based on identity card.

In the first 4 months of this initiative here were 30.000 users. The initiative was implemented by the

NGO Green Revolution in cooperation of the Municipality of Sector 1 from Bucharest.

StudentOBike – bike sharing for students in 5 universities in Romania

In October 2010 the NGO Green Revolution and the Raiffeisen Bank launched the service of bike

sharing with 200 bicycles in Bucharest (Academy Economy and technical University) and 300 bicycles

for all 3 other cities: Brasov, Cluj-Napoca and Iasi. Bicycles can be rented during he week and

weekend time for free based on the identity card. Project will take place until September 2011. This

initiative was implemented in cooperation of the management of all universities and municipalities.

More information is available at www.greenrevolution.ro.

I velo – bike sharing project in 5 cities in Romania

In May 2010, a new bike sharing project has been launched by the organisation green Revolution and

of 28

the Raiffeisen Bank. 1,100 bicycles have been put up for rent in 5 major cities in Romania: in Bucharest

(600 bicycles), in Brasov (100), in Cluj-Napoca (135), in Iasi (135) and in Constanta (135). Altogether

there are 8 bike renting centres and bicycles can be rented for free with the ID card. Until now there

were 550.000 users of bikes and there were over 1 million hours done on the bicycles. Thanks to this

project 72 green jobs have been created. The project is implemented under the patronage of the

Ministry of Environment and Forests, and in cooperation with municipalities of the respective cities.

More info at http://www.ivelo.ro, www.greenrevolution.ro

Cicloteque – bike renting centres in Bucharest

In 2008, NGO “MaiMultVerde” together with UniCredit Ţiriac Bank opened a bike rental centre with 150

fully equipped bicycles (including helmets etc.). Bicycles are rented based on the price list with some

reductions for pupils, students, pensioners, and unemployed. In 2009, Cicloteque attracted

approximately 8,000 users.

Within this initiative there were organised many other events such as Bike Walk, Car free day, Autumn,

Cyclo-tour, photo competition Cicloteque and provided free of charge bicycles for the Museums Night

and Night of Cultural Institutes. Apart from the 58 km of bicycle paths arranged by the Municipality of

Bucharest, within the Cicloteque project there were bicycle stand arranged in 20 important locations in

the city. In 2010, two more rental centres were opened, and another two in 2011. At the moment there

are 5 bicycle renting centres in Bucharest within the Cicloteque project.

More info at http://www.cicloteque.ro.

3.7 If you have any quantitative indicators on MM measures or activities implemented, please note them here.

There is no official evidence in Romania for indicators on MM measures or activities implemented.

3.8 Are the European Structural Funds used to fund MM measures in your country?

The Regional Operational Programme 2007 - 2013 (REGIO) is one of the Romanian operational programmes

agreed with the European Union and a very important tool for implementing the national strategy and the

regional development policies. It is applicable to all eight development regions of Romania. The Regional

Operational Programme in Romania is financed under the one of the structural funds of the European Union –

the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF). The total budget allocated to the ROP is approximately

4.4 billion Euros for the period of 2007-2013. EU funding represents approximately 84% of the ROP budget.

The rest comes from national funds, public co-financing (14%) and private co-financing (2%).

The distribution of funds is done on the priority axes of the Regional Operational Programme. Priorities and

share of funds supporting transport and mobility are the following:

- Priority 1: Support of sustainable urban development (30% of the total budget)

- Priority 2: Improvement of the regional and local transport infrastructure (20.35% of the total budget)

- Priority 5: Sustainable development and promotion of tourism (15% of the total budget).

Besides already mentioned Regional Operational Programme, there are a number of MM international

projects funded directly from European Structural Funds (e.g. ERDF), having Romanian partners. A quite

important and well known initiative is CIVITAS under which already 5 Romanian Cities have become

members. Many other European projects are financed under the 6th and 7

th FP.

Example of project cofinanced from ERDF: CAPRICE – cofinanced by INTERREG IVC

Bucharest municipality is part of the CAPRICE partnership consisting of regional and local authorities

responsible for policy implementation in public transport, for public procurement and integration of public

transport services, for tariff integration and passenger information, and for control of quality in public transport

services. These actors are key players in their regions for improving efficiency of public transport services also

of 28

in terms of energy consumption, and for implementation of innovative and environmental friendly new

propulsion and emission-reducing technologies in public transport fleets. CAPRICE provides

recommendations for policies addressing the challenges emerged from the rapid increase of vehicles in cities,

and provides best practice for the partner cities and facilitate the exchange of knowledge. Project website

http://www.caprice-project.info

3.9 Which other European funding programmes are used in your country to fund MM? Who is using them?

Several examples of these projects are given below1:

Project’s name Origin of funding Romanian partner Project period

ELTIS Plus IEE Association for Urban

Transition, ATU

2010-2013

PIMMS TRANSFER INTERREG IVC Municipality of Timisoara 2008-2011

CAPRICE INTERREG IVC Bucharest General

Municipality

200-2011

BENEFIT IEE Romanian Union of

Public Transport

Operators (URTP)

2008-2011

COMMERCE IEE RATB - Bucharest

Surface Public Transport

Operator, Chamber of

Commerce and Industry,

Bucharest

2007 - 2010

CIVITAS MODERN CIVITAS IPA Craiova 2008-2012

CIVITAS SUCCESS Ploiesti Municipality, Oil

and Gaz University,

Ploiesti Public Transport

Company

2005-2009

1 The list of projects is not exhaustive and represents the list of project finalized, implemented or started in the

last 3 years.

National

Authorities

Regional

Authorities

Local

Authorities

NGOs or NPOs Other: (please

specify)

CIVITAS X Local public

transport

operators

IEE X X Local public

transport

operators

LIFE + Local public

transport

operators

INTERREG X

Other: (please

specify)

X X

of 28

CIVITAS SMILE CIVITAS Suceava Municipality 2005-2009

CIVITAS ARCHIMEDES CIVITAS Iasi Municipality, Iasi

Public Transport

Company

2008-2012

MMOVE INTERREG IVC Brasov Metropolitan

Agency

2008-2011

SpiCycles IEE Ploiesti Municipality,

RATB - Bucharest


Operator

2006-2009

ACTIVE ACCESS IEE Harghita Energy

Management Public

Service, Harghita, The

Association for Urban

Transition

2009-2013

ISEMOA IEE Romanian Union of

Public Transport

Operators (URTP)

2010-2013

ENERQI IEE Romanian Union of

Public Transport

Operators (URTP)

2010-2013

Star-Net Transport 7 FP Romanian Union of

Public Transport

Operators (URTP)

2009-2011

Added Value IEE Romanian Union of

Public Transport

Operators (URTP)

2007-2010

CIVITAS CATALIST CIVITAS RATB - Bucharest


Operator

2007-2011

3.10 How do you think financing of MM could be improved at all levels?

European: There is quite low absorption capacity of European funds in Romania, which results from the lack

of information, lack of experience in managing projects and little ability to find an international group of

partners. More information and training on possible funding should be given, and at the same time the national

agencies/national contact points have to be more active.

National: To assure a better cooperation between public authorities and foreign/local investors, fiscal

incentives, supportive public policies, implementing the best project ideas in order to attract funds, appointing

one single authority responsible for implementation of MM.

Regional: More interaction between, local, national and regional financing is needed. The funds should

complement each other and offer integrated financing system. This also refers to adjusting financing periods.

of 28

3.11 What is public opinion of, and reaction to, MM in your country? What challenges does this present when implementing MM measures?

The participants of the national EPOMM workshops in Romania indicated there are numerous problems

regarding the implementation of MM in Romania, situation that is transmitted also at city level. The challenges

when implementing MM in Romania are the following:

- lack of information, bureaucracy, corruption

- lack of relevant education, poor implication of the public and decision makers

- lack of integrated projects

- lack of vision and funding

- old mentality

- little involvement of the central/ local authorities, lack of public will

3.12 What other challenges or problems can you identify with regards to MM in your country?

There is a number of important challenges with regards to implementation of MM in Romania, which were

already highlighted throughout the report. Possible mitigation measures are the following.

- Ensuring coordination and specific policy development at national, regional, and local level for urban

transport systems authorities for (horizontal & vertical);

- Setting up central and regional responsible institutions for urban transport policy, mobility management

planning and implementation of EU Transport Action Plans and programs focused on intermodality of

transport networks and services;

- Defining priorities and ways to best reach the EU objectives developing national policy and implementing

specific priorities action plans;

- Creating frameworks and providing knowledge for encouraging integrated urban and regional sustainable

development projects based on interconnectivity and intermodality planning and operating principles for

passengers and freight;

- Promoting urban and regional planning regulations for enforced multilevel sustainable integrated mobility

plans;

- Introducing priority exclusive public transport and bicycles lanes for metropolitan areas and for regional

passengers’ travels and urban high motorized areas.

- More involvement of the decision makers at all levels (national/ regional/ local).

3.13 Other comments

Participants of the first and second EPOMM workshop in Romania have highlighted the following needs in

regards to achieve successful implementation of MM in Romania:

- More training on financing systems and awareness of the public policy factors; implementation of

integrated mobility projects; existing regulations, development of the MM concept; role and

responsibilities of each party involved; financial conditions; transposing MM into practice; integrating

the MM concept in transport policies; transport planning and traffic engineering; urbanism and

sustainable transport; “soft measures” and technical input;

- More experience exchange on best practices and MM methods that are efficiently applied; projects that

can be implemented with a minimum of financing, ongoing projects, development of MM concept in

other European countries; public policies; implementing tools; good practices and projects

of 28

implemented; promoting alternative means of urban transport; correlation between MM concept and

measures and systems;

- More study visits regarding the implemented projects and used tools;

- More involvement of the academic sector in MM projects and training for the academics.

of 28

4 Trends and further developments

4.1 What is effective in your country in the field of MM? Why?

Since MM is only at very early stage in Romania, it is rather difficult to assess the effectiveness of relevant

measures.

As it was already mentioned, a lot of initiatives/measures related to sustainable urban mobility are taking place

at local level. The cities try themselves to fight the increasing traffic and congestion problems and get involved

in many different EU projects, as well as start their own initiatives. Cofinancing received through EU projects

and experience exchange with other European partner cities evidently helps to implement certain measures.

Some of the examples of the initiatives could be the following:

- Iasi, CIVITAS city: School Travel Plans, Travel Information Telephone Service, Education and Promotion

Programme in Iasi, City Cycle Routes, Public transport user forum, Bike sharing service for students

(StudentOBike)

- Craiova, CIVITAS City: Flexible services for industrial areas, Software tools for mobility management

actions in industrial areas, Information and awareness rising.

- Suceava, CIVITAS City: Information and awareness raising

- Bucharest, CIVITAS City: A workplace travel plan implemented by SIVECO in Bucharest, The

pedestrianization of Bucharest’s Historic Centre,

- Oradea: Changing mobility behaviour - reducing urban vehicle emissions

- Sibiu: Parking in the Historical Centre

- Ploiesti, CIVITAS City: Implementing new infrastructures for walking and cycling

- Brasov: In town without my car campaign.

4.2 Describe MM measures that are successful and will be continued in the future.

Education, Information, Awareness Rising and Training campaigns are very successful among young people

and transport planning professionals. These have to be continued and more targeted to specific topics to be

also appreciated and applied by companies, manufactures and businesses, services providers, central and

local authorities.

4.3 What are the future policies that are being drafted or considered in your country currently?

In general, political leaders and high-ranked officials are still reluctant to take clear position in favour of limiting

personal car traffic and usage, partially because the recent political – cultural legacy of restrictions imposed

during communism. Moreover, they are interested in solutions that could solve on the short-term the urban

traffic congestions. Preference is given to hard-measures versus soft-measures (more roads and more

underground parking stations), for which possibilities to achieve results based on changed behaviour are not

trusted.

However, there are a number of opportunities to continue the media/ public interest for different MM elements,

by means of different awareness raising campaigns organized for example within European Mobility Week

(such small campaigns were organized in Bucharest. Ploiesti, Iasi, Suceava, etc, in 2009 and focused on

promoting cycling as a alternative transport mode in urban areas). Also it is important that more Romanian

actors (especially local authorities, public transport operators, NGOs) are involved in European partnership

projects (e.g. CIVITAS, IEE).

of 28

4.4 Which example(s) – in term of policy, strategy or implementation – from other European countries would you like to see transferred in your country?

MM is not at all integrated at the planning system. There are many good examples of integration MM into

planning system, regulations and rehabilitation actions .regarding new development and, representative

cultural-historical inheritance areas that could be potential measures also to be transferred to Romania

especially for passengers and freight intermodality, car use shift to biking and public transport modes.

Pa

ge

26

of 2

8

5

Kn

ow

led

ge

in

fra

str

uc

ture

of

MM

Ne

two

rks,

org

an

isa

tio

ns &

asso

cia

tio

ns

active

in

MM

Ke

y M

M e

xp

ert

s a

nd

po

licy m

ake

rs (

with

co

nta

ct d

eta

ils)

Ke

y w

eb

site

s

Ke

y d

ocum

ents

Min

istr

y o

f R

eg

ion

al D

eve

lopm

en

t a

nd

Tu

rism

Ms.

Mo

nic

a O

revic

ea

nu

,

mo

nic

a.o

revic

ea

nu

@m

drt

.ro

ww

w.m

drt

.ro

U

rba

n a

nd

te

rrito

ria

l le

gis

lation a

nd

reg

ula

tion

s

Te

ch

nic

al sta

nd

ard

s a

nd

no

rms f

or

tra

nsp

ort

in

frastr

uctu

re a

nd f

acili

tie

s

Na

tio

nal an

d E

U f

un

ded

pro

gra

ms a

nd

pro

jects

Inte

rnation

al a

nd

cro

ss b

ord

er

co

ope

ratio

n, b

est

MM

pra

ctices

exp

eri

en

ces o

f citie

s

Th

e A

ssocia

tio

n f

or

Urb

an

Tra

nsitio

n

w

ww

.atu

.org

.ro

RA

TB

– B

uch

are

st

Su

rfa

ce

Pub

lic

Tra

nsp

ort

Op

era

tor

w

ww

.ra

tb.r

o

Ro

ma

nia

n U

nio

n o

f T

ran

sp

ort

Op

era

tors

-

UR

TP

w

ww

.urt

p.r

o

Bra

sov, R

om

ania

n E

nerg

y c

itie

s

Associa

tion (

OE

R)

w

ww

.oe

r.ro

htt

p:/

/ww

w.h

art

ave

lo.r

o/

htt

p:/

/ww

w.v

elo

rutia

.ro

/

TE

RR

A M

ilen

iul II

I

ww

w.t

err

aiii

.ng

o.r

o

Gre

en

Re

vo

lutio

n

w

ww

.gre

en

revo

lution

.ro

SM

AR

T D

eve

lop

men

t C

en

ter

w

ww

.sm

art

.org

.ro

Inte

llig

en

t T

ran

sp

ort

Syste

ms R

om

ania

its-r

om

ania

.ro

Pa

ge

27

of 2

8

T

he

Na

tio

nal S

usta

ina

ble

De

ve

lopm

en

t

Str

ate

gy R

om

an

ia 2

01

3-2

02

0-2

03

0

T

he

Na

tio

nal D

eve

lop

men

t P

lan

20

07

-

20

13

T

he

Na

tio

nal S

tra

teg

ic R

efe

ren

ce

Fra

me

wo

rk 2

00

7-

20

13

N

atio

nal S

trate

gy f

or

Su

sta

inab

le

Tra

nsp

ort

fo

r 2

00

7-2

01

3,

with

pro

jection

s

to 2

020

and

203

0

T

he

Re

gio

na

l O

pe

ration

al P

rog

ram

me

20

07

-20

13

of 28

6 Next steps for the Mobility Management Monitors

6.1 Suggestions on the use of MMMs for further dissemination

The MMM could have been distributed to:

- the policy makers at national level;

- the local level; Romanian municipalities, transport operators, and associations of municipalities;

- any other person, companies and businesses interested in MM issues in Romania.

6.2 Improvement of this template for next years

mobility management monitors romania 2011 › old_website › docs ›...

Documents