Page 223 - Proceeding 2015

SZABO Septimiu FAMP
DECENTRALIZATION DEVELOPMENTS IN ROMANIA AND POLAND SINCE 1990 CCASP

and the six district council receive 64.50% with only 7% earmarked for balancing the local budgets within
the capital. 70% of the state revenues are allocated based on the financial capacity of counties and 30%
is based on surface. The county councils receive 27% of the total allocation. The other 73% is divided
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 11 TH ADMINISTRATION AND PUBLIC MANAGEMENT INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE
between the municipalities and the communes. In 2014 there were big differences between counties in
terms of budgets as Bucharest had an allocation 15 times higher than the smallest county in the country

(Ministry of Regional Development and Public Administration, 2014)..

30% of the local budgets are earmarked for personnel, 23% are for goods and services, EU-funded
projects take 9% and 6% are earmarked for social assistance. In terms of services, education

infrastructure, social benefits and general public services have the highest allocations (Ministry of
Regional Development and Public Administration, 2014).

As of 1995 local governments have been allowed to borrow money under the supervision of a committee

appointed by the central government. These loans may be taken as bank credits or bonds issues up to a
level of 30% of the average own revenues in the past three years (Ruano and Profiroiu, 2016). According
30 th – 31 st October 2015 ”Strategic Management for Local Communities” Bucharest governments had a share of 6%.
to the latest provided by the Ministry of Finance in September 2015 out of the total public debt, local

Looking retrospectively it can be noticed that Romania is still influenced by the communist legacy of
centralism (Hughes et al. 2004). Nonetheless, due to international pressures, the country embarked

slowly in a couple of decentralisation developments. However, decisions have not been coherent and
consistent and were constantly delayed (Rezessy et al. 2006). In addition, as the central government has
had a continuous control over the state budget, there was a mismatch between the devolved

responsibilities and the resources made available (Poputoaia and Bouzarovski 2010). While the
legislation might have seemed coherent, weak coordination and a lack of clarity regarding roles and
accountability hampered the implementation (Laking, 2005).

3. DECENTRALISATION DEVELOPMENTS IN POLAND SINCE 1990

Historically, Poland has been a unitary state, subordinated to the authority of the central leadership – a

king or a government after World War I. Still, especially in the first half of the 20th century, regions were
given a certain autonomy. The Polish communist regime, however, abolished the traditional local

government apparatus by replacing it with entities subordinated to the centre party. Since 1990 Poland
has made a U-turn and saw decentralisation as the key element of the democrat functional state.

The first developments of the Polish decentralisation took place between 1989 and 1997 when the

municipalities were re-empowered. Nevertheless, the territorial organisation of the state remained

221