Etropolization of Large Urban Centers in Omania Nalyses and Solutions

Algerian Journal of Engineering Architecture and Urbanism Vol. 2 Nr.
1 2018
Metropolization of large urban centers in Romania: Analyses and solutions

Antonio Valentin Tache, Sorin Daniel Manole, Alexandru-Ionuţ Petrişor
Received: 02 December 2017 • Revised: 27 February 2018 • Accepted: 17 March 2018
METROPOLIZATION OF LARGE URBAN CENTERS IN

ROMANIA: ANALYSES AND SOLUTIONS
Antonio Valentin TACHE
Senior Researcher 3, National Institute for Research and Development in Constructions, Urbanism and
Sustainable Spatial Development URBAN-INCERC, Şoseaua Pantelimon, no. 266, sector 2, cod
021652, Bucharest, Romania, Telephone 0040212550270, Fax 0040212550062, e-mail:
tonytache62@gmail.com
Sorin Daniel MANOLE

Associate Professor, PhD, “Constantin Brâncoveanu” University, Calea Bascovului nr. 2A, cod
110095, Piteşti, Romania, Telephone: 0040248212627, Fax: 0040248221098, e-mail:
sorin.daniel.manole@yahoo.com
Alexandru-Ionuţ PETRIŞOR
Associate Professor and Director, PhD, PhD, Habil, Doctoral School of Urban Planning, 'Ion Mincu'
University of Architecture and Urban Planning, str. Academiei nr. 18-20, 010014, Bucharest,
Romania, Telephone 0040213077191, Fax 0040213077109, e-mail: alexandru.petrisor@uauim.ro
Abstract:
Metropolization is one of the most dynamic processes of the contemporary world, due to changing
existing economic patterns and creating new relationships between major cities. Therefore, specific
tools and techniques for periodic evaluation of medium- and long-term territorial development policies
are needed in order to assess the dynamics of territorial development of metropolitan areas. In this
context, the article aims to introduce an innovative methodology based on an IT-mathematical model
for the evaluation of the main indicators for characterizing the metropolitan territories in Romania in
terms of dynamics and existing territorial disparities. The implementation of GIS technology and
statistical support in assessing the Romanian metropolitan areas contributes substantially to carrying
out in-depth, open and innovative analyses, used to phrase development scenarios at the territorial
level. From the analysis of the aggregate indicators in a composite indicator (performance index),
interesting conclusions are drawn regarding the definition of functional urban areas (ZUF), the
improvement of integrated development strategies in functional urban areas and the metropolitan
governance system.
Key words: polycentricity, territorial statistics, disparities, GIS, spatial planning, Romania
Introduction:
The way how people and economic activities evolved over time and space has led to
many structural transformations. In particular, the improvement of communication
technologies and the implementation of IT technologies, has led in many economic sectors to
increased mobility of people and goods and the transformation of economic development
processes, which has generated processes of suburbanization and integration with their
surrounding hinterland (Brezzi and Veneri, 2014). A metropolis, according to specialty
studies, is a city with a population of at least 500,000 inhabitants, characterized by the
following features: excellent quality of services, institutions and facilities, potential for
innovation in technology, economy, politics and culture, characterized by specificity and
attractiveness (Bassand, 1997). In contrast to the cities of the industrial age, today's
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND)

8
Algerian Journal of Engineering Architecture and Urbanism Vol. 2 Nr. 1 2018

metropolis does not produce goods, but it provides quality services and generates knowledge
in the field of knowledge. Within the metropolises, the headquarters of global corporations are
established, which here sends orders for the reallocation of production centers. In
metropolitan areas, locations for banks serving large corporations, law firm offices, firms and
companies specialized in advertising, marketing and consulting are established.
Integrated metropolises develop not only with metropolitan areas, but also within a global
network of metropolitan areas operating in the network. Space mobility is one of the main
features of the metropolitan process. According to M. Privelli (2003), the expansion of the
metropolitan area into the contemporary world depends on the type and quality of the services
offered in the core of the metropolis; the level of scientific and technological development,
the ability of service providers and consumers to access the latest achievements of science,
economic, technical and legal access, the type of legal and administrative system, and the
political situation. In general, the integrated approach to the development of metropolitan
areas must take into account those responsibilities that are considered crucial to the
development of the metropolis and its direct surroundings, namely the public transport,
territorial marketing and spatial planning system (Bartosiewicz and Pielesiak, 2014). In
relation to Europe, spatial planning undergoes substantial transformations, where the so-called
“Europeanization” of planning has led to a reorientation of planning policies, systems and
approaches, as a result of national responses to European initiatives. Thus, spatial planning
spans from the traditional dimension of national politics to a “meta-governmental” model that
adapts to current political trends and socio-economic dynamics: globalization /
Europeanization, economic competitiveness, development of territorial development agendas,
adaptation to new scales of social and economic life (Cremer-Schulte, 2015).
The metropolitan process is closely linked to the concept of polycentric development

advocating the creation of dynamic economic integration areas, distributed in a balanced way
throughout the European Union and comprising the internationally accessible network of
metropolitan regions and their hinterland (towns, municipalities and rural areas various sizes)
(Tache and Petrişor, 2017). The polycentric urban system can be defined as a functionally
integrated socio-spatial entity, made up of several urban nodes, which can be different in size,
but all play an important role in the system and are linked by intensive reciprocal and
multidirectional relationships (Tache et al., 2016; Petrişor, 2017). Meijers and Burger (2010),
for instance, have shown how different spatial structures – and in particular the
monocentricity/ polycentricity dimension – affect the economic performance of metropolitan
areas. From functional perspectives and governance, functional urban areas are
internationally considered essential basic polycentric development. Functional urban areas are
often identified with metropolitan areas. Policentricity is currently considered a useful spatial
planning tool to enhance the competitiveness, social cohesion and environmental
sustainability of cities (Davoudi, 2003). Urban areas regarded as polycentric development
nodes have been the subject of numerous studies at European and national level. Numerous
European studies delineate Functional Urban Areas (Functional Metropolitan Areas) based on
9

commuting data at the workplace reflecting the 15% threshold of commuter traffic to the core
city of the economically active population (IGEAT et al., 2007).
The challenges of competitive metropolitan development have become the subject of

extensive academic discussion about governance (Dieleman and Faludi, 1998). At the same
time, the challenges of intra-urban development have already been addressed in the URBAN
policy debate in the first and second programming periods at European level (Davoudi, 2003).
Metropolization is one of the most dynamic processes of the contemporary world, changing
existing settlement patterns and creating new relations between large cities (Jałowiecki,
2006). In the context of affirmation of metropolitan areas and intelligent metropolitan areas,
the precise definition of functional urban areas represents a process to maximize integrated
territorial development policies. Metropolization is a process of attracting new specific
activities, jobs and inhabitants, relying heavily on competitiveness. This means that the
attractiveness of specific metropolitan functions and activities is based on certain strengths of
cities, usually the most powerful of them, and their potential, which offers area-specific
advantages. In this context, the metropolitan governance modalities are crucial to territorial
development by strengthening competitiveness and attracting new functionalities.
Metropolitan areas now have a new meaning, since their local government is cooperating and
working with civic and private sectors to address regional policy issues in a network type
(Hamilton, 2014). The great challenge for these areas is to determine the appropriate
coordination between the formulation of strategic planning perspectives for the whole
metropolitan area and the arrangements for governance that enable decisions to be made. New
spatial development perspective is a dynamic concept in which cities are not only regarded as
centers of supply but also as engines of development (Castells, 1996; Sassen, 2001;
Schindegger and Tatzberger, 2002). The new vision for spatial planning at European and
global level is the development of cities as intelligent metropolises. The term “intelligent”
implies, in particular, an implied or explicit ambition of a city to improve economic, social
and environmental standards and therefore its competitiveness in the urban competition
(Giffinger and Gudrun, 2010). Intelligent approaches to functional specialization are
multiplied by the private investments to be trained in these areas of specialization according
to the principle “limited resources directed to limited areas”.
Problematic:
In Romania, the definition of the metropolitan area is made by Law no. 351/2001
regarding the approval of the National Territory Planning Plan - Section IV - The Network of
Localities, Annex I, which defines it as “the area created by association, based on a
voluntary partnership between the major urban centers (the capital of Romania and the
municipalities of the 1st rank) and the urban and rural localities located in the immediate
area, up to 30 km away, between which several collaborative relations have developed”
(Parliament of Romania, 2001). According to Urban Planning Law no. 350/2001, Annex II,
the metropolitan territory is “the area situated around the large urban agglomerations,

10

bounded by specialized studies, in which reciprocal relations of influence are created in the
field of communication, economic, social, cultural and urban infrastructure” (Parliament of
Romania, 2001). Amended Law 215/2001 defines the formation of metropolitan realities as
intercommunity development associations. Art. 11 states that “two or more administrative-
territorial units have the right, within the limits of the powers of their deliberative and
executive authorities, to cooperate and to associate, under the law, by forming inter-
community development associations with legal personality, by law private and public utility”
(Parliament of Romania, 2001). The metropolization process of the major cities in Romania
has been relatively new, and has led to differences in the trend of their development and
hinterland. An important role in transforming metropolitan areas in Romania into engines of
economic development is played by the efficiency of the spatial planning process and their
good governance.
Thus, the metropolization of the territory should be analyzed in the context of the
specialization of knowledge-based economic activities at the level of large urban centers
(Krätke, 2007) and their attractiveness. For this reason, most metropolitan areas in Romania
have to become functional urban areas that can provide more efficient territorial organization
and better access to services of general interest, thus enabling progress in terms of cohesion
and competitiveness objectives. An Integrated Metropolitan Strategy (SMI) in the medium
and long term is one of the ways to ensure the balance to be achieved for this purpose. The
strategy consists of a long-term vision that sets the context and the broad directions, and a
package of medium- and long-term strategic policies, programs and projects.
The metropolization process being a dynamic phenomenon, a key element for a proper policy
at the level of major urban areas is policy monitoring at the territorial level. The data obtained
in the system are periodically updated, aggregated and presented in synthetic form in maps,
tables and statistical indicators to highlight the dynamics and territorial disparities at
metropolitan areas (Dobrin et al., 2010a, b; Manole et al., 2011, 2012). Different statistical
techniques including regression analysis, factor analysis, multicriteria analysis and cluster
analysis can be used to produce a composite index of selected indicators (Coombes and
Wong, 1994). Statistical evaluation techniques should be designed to match the indicators for
all areas studied and take into account both quantitative and qualitative aspects. The most
important step in the process of analyzing territorial indicators is to clarify the basic concept
to be represented by the analysis. The proposed methodology for the assessment of
metropolitan areas in Romania is based on a system of minimal but representative indicators
for the characterization of metropolitan territories, an innovative solution based on the
standard breakdown scheme (Jenks) (Tache and Tache, 2016) and on GIS support to produce
hierarchies of territorial indicators at metropolitan area levels and socio-economic
discrepancies at each metropolitan area, displayed as charts and maps.

11

Methodology for evaluating the metropolitan areas of Romania:

Starting from the studied concept, namely the development of metropolitan areas in
Romania, the representative indicators that highlight the dynamics of these territories are
represented by the phenomenon of population mobility. Thus, the indicators collected in time
series are represented by statistical indicators on the population, the number of employees, the
number of new dwellings and the incomes of the population and the turnover of localities,
obtained from the Tempo database (National Institute of Statistics Bucharest, 2018).
The spatial database made in the GIS system was structured as follows:
• Population of metropolitan areas in evolution (2008, 2011, 2014, 2017);
• Number of evolving employees (2008, 2011, 2014, 2016);
• Number of new homes in the last 5 years measured statistically (2012, 2013, 2014, 2015,
2016);
• Total number of dwellings (2016);
• Population revenue over the past 5 years measured statistically (2012,2013,2014, 2015,
2016);
• The turnover of the localities in the last 5 years measured statistically (2012, 2013, 2014,
2015, 2016).
Starting from these basic statistical indicators, combined indicators were developed reflecting
the evolution of the metropolitan areas, both in quantitative and qualitative terms.
For the population field, the following combined indicators were calculated:
• Population evolution 2011-2008;
• Population evolution 2014/2011;
• Population evolution 2017/2014.
For the housing domain, the indicators analyzed were the following:
• Number of new homes in the last 5 years;
• Evolution of the number of new dwellings in the last 5 years in relation to the total
number of dwellings in 2016.
For the assessment of the number of evolving employees, the following combined indicators
were considered:
• Evolution of the number of employees 2011/2008;
• The ratio between the number of 2016 employees and the population volume 2016.
For the indicators of the population incomes and the turnover of the metropolitan areas, the
following indicators were calculated:
• Average increase or decrease in population incomes for 2012-2016;
• Average slope of growth or decrease in the turnover of metropolitan areas.
The next step for these combined indicators was to group the values recorded at the level of
the metropolitan areas at 10 intervals according to the Standard Breaks (Jencks) - standard
breakdown scheme, thus obtaining 10 groups, which, in the rising order of values, scores

12

ranging from 1 to 10 were attributed. Jencks' classification based on the natural grouping of
values is done by identifying breakpoints by looking at those default data pooling patterns.
Values are divided into classes where the boundaries are marked by large jumps from one
value to another. If an indicator has recorded a value of 0 at a studied location, the score
attributed to that UAT at this indicator will be 0. Therefore all the values of the selected
indicators have been converted into scores of the groups they belong to (1,2, ..., 10, possibly
0), and this was done with ArcGIS 10.4's statistical support.
For each grouping of indicators (population, dwelling, number of employees, income,

turnover) using iterative techniques (Delphi method), NIRD URBAN-INCERC's spatial
planning specialists have determined weights to achieve a single indicator for each group of
indicators. Finally, using the same iterative method at the level of the unique indicators on
each indicator group a composite performance index of the studied metropolitan areas was
determined.
Results and discussions:

The evaluation of the territorial indicators proposed in this study resulted in a GIS-
based thematic map showing the evolution of the constituent localities of the legally
constituted metropolitan areas and also the identification of the potential functional urban
areas.
The weights established by NIRD URBAN-INCERC Bucharest for each single indicator of
the indicator groups used were the following:
• Single population ratio - 22%
• Unique housing index - 11%
• Unique number of employees - 30%
• Single Income Index and Turnover of Localities - 37%
The question of the interpretability of the analysis is the most important part of the evaluation
of the statistical indicators, because the objective of aggregating the indicators is to
adequately provide information on the problems of the metropolization of the territory of
Romania.
The use of GIS technology in conducting territorial analyzes on metropolitan areas provides a
substantial contribution to carrying out in-depth, open and innovative analyzes, with the
possibility of formulating development scenarios at territorial level (Petrişor, 2016).
The map of the performance index at the level of the metropolitan areas of Romania is
displayed in Fig. 1.
From the analysis of thematic map on the performance index of the metropolitan areas, we
can draw the following conclusions:
• Metropolitan areas that can be assimilated to functional urban areas are located around
Bucharest, Timisoara (Timis County) and partly around the cities of Constanta, Arad,
Cluj-Napoca, Iasi, Brasov, Ploiesti (Prahova county), Sibiu, Oradea (Bihor County), Baia
Mare (Maramures County), Pitesti (Arges County) and Bacau;
• Corridor of high potential territorial development: Timisoara-Arad, Bucuresti-Ploiesti;

13

• Corridor of development with medium potential: Baia-Mare - Satu-Mare, Suceava-

Botosani, Braila-Galati;
• Metropolitan areas too large territorial in relation to the competitive potential: Craiova
metropolitan area, Satu-Mare metropolitan area, Ramnicu-Valcea metropolitan area, Zalau
metropolitan area (Salaj county);
• Metropolitan areas with low potential for competitiveness: Vaslui metropolitan area,
Corvina metropolitan area (Hunedoara county), Zalau metropolitan area (Salaj county),
Roman metropolitan area (Neamt County), Piatra Neamt metropolitan area (Neamt
County).
Fig 1. Evaluation of metropolitan areas in Romania
Also, from the analyzes carried out by groups of indicators, there is a very large increase in
turnover for the Cluj-Napoca municipalities (2 times increase of the turnover in 2016
compared to 2009 (becoming the second city as turnover after Bucharest – the capital of
Romania), Timisoara, Brasov, Arad (2.5 times increase in turnover in 2016 compared to
2009), Oradea and Targu Mures. Municipalities with high turnover but with slower growth
rates are the cities: Constanta, Ploiesti, Pitesti, Sibiu, Iasi, Galati, Craiova and Bacau. Of the
municipalities with moderate turnover but with significant increases in the period 2009-2016
we mention the municipalities of Baia Mare, Satu Mare, Alba-Iulia, Suceava, Braila.
Municipalities with insignificant increases in turnover are also municipalities whose
metropolitan areas have a low potential to become functional areas. These include the cities of
Ramnicu Valcea, Deva, Piatra Neamt, Vaslui.

14

In the chapter on the number of employees, the municipalities of Cluj-Napoca and Sibiu
registered a significant increase. Also, average increases were registered in the municipalities
of Brasov, Oradea and Alba Iulia, while decreases in the number of employees were
registered in the municipalities of Ramnicu-Valcea and Vaslui. Municipalities with constant
population growth are the municipalities of Cluj-Napoca and Iasi.
In terms of population incomes, the highest wages are in the municipalities of Bucharest,
Cluj-Napoca, Timisoara, Sibiu and Pitesti, while at the opposite pole there are Braila,
Ramnicu Valcea, Vaslui munitions.
Conclusion:
The assessment of metropolitan areas in Romania highlights the country's
development. Thus, the analysis demonstrated an economic and social development of
Romania at different speeds. There are territories where growth poles have an upward trend,
and here we mention the capital of Romania - Bucharest with the metropolitan area, Timis-
Arad conurbation, metropolitan area of Cluj-Napoca, Oradea, Constanta, Brasov, Ploiesti,
Pitesti. But there are also many municipalities with low turnover compared to the big cities
and which have an insignificant economic growth to support a network of polycentric
localities. Space planning plays a significant role in attracting investment and increasing
urban prosperity. Increasing the number of sustainable cities is absolutely necessary for the
economic development of Romania and for the European desires for territorial cohesion.
The formulation of a clear long-term vision of the development of the city and the
neighboring areas by developing integrated metropolitan development strategies,
strengthening the public-private partnership, implementing urban and territorial marketing as
strategic components of territorial planning, and last but not least a managerial structure to
manage the proposed resources and projects contributes significantly to maximizing the socio-
economic development potential.
Clusters, as elements of increasing competitiveness, must be supported to develop in those

sectors where large cities have functional and intelligent functional specializations. The
development of industrial parks is an important asset for the economy due to the large
investments that are attracted to these areas. The business pulse here is also very good with
the profits or losses declared by the companies that administer these perimeters.
Technological, industrial, innovation and science parks (PTIS) are increasingly seen as means
of creating dynamic clusters that accelerate economic growth and increase international
competitiveness.
Acknowledgement:
This work was supported by a grant of the Romanian National Authority for Scientific
Research and Innovation CNCS/CCCDI – UEFISCDI, project number PN-III-P2-2.1-PED-
2016-0733 PNCDI III.
References:
Bartosiewicz B., Pielesiak I. (2014), Metropolisation Processes in Contemporary Space of Poland, in: Marszał
T. (Ed.), Origin Spatial Development of Contemporary Poland in Łódź University Geographical
Research, Łódź University Łódź, Poland.

15

Bassand M. (1997), Métropolisation et inégalités sociales. Presses polytechniques et universitaires romandes,

Lausanne, Switzerland.
Brezzi M., Veneri P. (2015), Assessing polycentric urban systems in the OECD: Country, regional and
metropolitan perspectives, European Planning Studies 23(6): 1128-1145.
Castells M. (1996), The Information age: Economy, society and culture. Volume I - The Rise of the Network
Society, Blackwell Publishers, Malden, USA.
Coombes M., Wong C. (1994), Methodological steps in the development of multivariate indexes for urban and
regional policy analysis, Environment and Planning A 26(8): 1297-1316.
Cremer-Schulte D. (2015), With or Without You? Strategic Spatial Planning and Territorial Re-Scaling in
Grenoble Urban Region, Planning, Practice & Research 29(3): 287-301.
Davoudi S. (2003), European briefing: polycentricity in European spatial planning: from an analytical tool to a
normative agenda, European Planning Studies 11(8): 979-999.
Dieleman F. M., Faludi A. (1998), Polynucleated metropolitan regions in Northwest Europe: theme of the
special issue, European Planning Studies 6(4): 365-377.
Dobrin M., Tache A. V., Petrişor A.-I. (2010), Development disparities in the administrative/territorial units
in Romania: hierarchy, methods, indicators, statistical analysis, Romanian Statistical Review 58(5):
16-26.
Dobrin M., Tache A. V., Petrişor A.-I. (2010), System of indicators to analyze regional development
disparities in Romania, Romanian Statistical Review 58(8): 25-37.
Giffinger R., Gudrun H. (2010), Smart cities ranking: an effective instrument for the positioning of the
cities?, ACE: Architecture, City and Environment 4(12): 7-26.
Hamilton D. K. (2014), Governing metropolitan areas: Growth and Change in a Networked Age, Routledge,
New York, USA.
IGEAT, IGSO, LATTS (2007), Study on Urban Functions - Final Report of ESPON 1.4.3., ESPON
Coordination Unit, Luxembourg, Luxembourg.
Jałowiecki B. (2006), Polish cities and metropolisation processes, Studia Regionalne i Lokalne Special Issue:
75-84.
Krätke S. (2007), Metropolisation of the European economic territory as a consequence of increasing
specialisation of urban agglomerations in the knowledge economy, European Planning Studies 15(1): 1-
27.
Manole S. D., Petrişor A.-I., Tache A. V., Pârvu E. (2011), GIS assessment of development gaps among
Romanian administrative units, Theoretical and Empirical Researches in Urban Management 6(4): 5-
19.
Manole S., Tache A. V., Petrişor A.-I., Pârvu E. (2012), Geographical Information Systems Assessment of
Development Disparities Among Romanian Regions of Development, Romanian Review of Regional
Studies 8(1): 3-16.
Meijers E. J., Burger M. J. (2010), Spatial Structure and Productivity in U.S. Metropolitan Areas,
Environment and Planning A 42: 1383-1402.
National Institute of Statistics (2018), Database TEMPO-online, http://statistici.insse.ro/shop/
Parliament of Romania (2001), Law no. 215/2001 on local public administration, Official Gazette 204.
Parliament of Romania (2001), Law no. 350/2001 on spatial and urban planning, Official Gazette 373.
Parliament of Romania (2001), Law no. 351 on the approval of the National Territory Spatial Plan - Section IV
- The Settlement Network, Official Gazette 408.
Petrişor A.-I. (2017), A diversity-based approach to the spatial development of socio-ecological systems,
Urbanism Architecture Constructions 8(2):143-162.
Petrişor A.-I. (2016), Geographical Information Systems as environmental, landscape and urban planning and
research tools. Romania as a case study, in: Bostenaru-Dan M., Craciun C. (Eds.), Space and time
visualisation, Springer Nature, Geneva, Switzerland, pp. 233-249.
Privelli M. (2003), Funkcja metropolitalna a process globalizacji, Studia Regionalne I Lokalne 14(4): 65-75.
Sassen S. (2001), The Global City, New York, USA.

16

Schindegger F., Tatzberger G. (2002), Polyzentrismus: ein europäisches Leitbild für die räumliche
Entwicklung, Österreichisches Institut für Raumplanung, Vienna, Austria.
Tache A. V., Petrişor A.-I. (2017), GIS-based IT model for assessing territorial accessibility in Romania,
International Journal of Human Settlements 1(2): 13-23.
Tache A. V., Tache M. (2016), A methodology for the evaluation of functional urban areas in Romania,
Romanian Journal of Geography 60(1): 73-83.
Tache A., Manole S. D., Tache M., Petrişor A.-I. (2016), Analysis of the polycentricity of Romanian county
residences, Urbanism Architecture Constructions 7(4): 301-320.

17

Etropolization of Large Urban Centers in Omania Nalyses and Solutions

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Etropolization of Large Urban Centers in Omania Nalyses and Solutions

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

Etropolization of Large Urban Centers in Omania Nalyses and Solutions

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Algerian Journal of Engineering Architecture and Urbanism Vol. 2 Nr.

Metropolization of large urban centers in Romania: Analyses and solutions

METROPOLIZATION OF LARGE URBAN CENTERS IN

Sorin Daniel MANOLE

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND)

Metropolization of large urban centers in Romania: Analyses and solutions

The metropolitan process is closely linked to the concept of polycentric development

Metropolization of large urban centers in Romania: Analyses and solutions

The challenges of competitive metropolitan development have become the subject of

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND)

Metropolization of large urban centers in Romania: Analyses and solutions

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND)

Metropolization of large urban centers in Romania: Analyses and solutions

Methodology for evaluating the metropolitan areas of Romania:

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND)

Metropolization of large urban centers in Romania: Analyses and solutions

For each grouping of indicators (population, dwelling, number of employees, income,

Results and discussions:

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND)

Metropolization of large urban centers in Romania: Analyses and solutions

• Corridor of development with medium potential: Baia-Mare - Satu-Mare, Suceava-

Fig 1. Evaluation of metropolitan areas in Romania

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND)

Metropolization of large urban centers in Romania: Analyses and solutions

Clusters, as elements of increasing competitiveness, must be supported to develop in those

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND)

Metropolization of large urban centers in Romania: Analyses and solutions

Bassand M. (1997), Métropolisation et inégalités sociales. Presses polytechniques et universitaires romandes,

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND)

Metropolization of large urban centers in Romania: Analyses and solutions

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND)

You might also like