Upload
others
View
1
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
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
Page 3 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
Page 5 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).
Page 6 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.
Page 7 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.
Page 8 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
Page 9 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.
Page 10 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.
Page 11 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)
Page 12 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.
Legislative measures (incl. taxes)
At the moment there are no legislative measures supporting MM at the regional level.
Promotion & awareness
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.
Page 13 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.
Legislative measures (incl. taxes)
Promotion & awareness
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.
Page 14 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.
Page 15 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;
Page 16 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”
Page 17 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,
Page 18 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
Page 19 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
Page 20 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
Page 21 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
Surface Public Transport
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
Surface Public Transport
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.
Page 22 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
Page 23 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.
Page 24 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).
Page 25 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
Page 28 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