index.1.jpg (3032 bytes) Note 7 – June 2003 

Raions and economy
 by Anatol Gudim

So, local elections are over. And now workaday routine activities begin – practical developing 32 new (old!) raions and debugging their administration. It lies ahead to get back buildings (majority of which are leased out or privatized), fill them with personnel; arrange communications, statistics, etc. A particular problem is employment, which requires measures of supporting entrepreneurship and initiative people. Pre-election political rhetoric is gradually fading and the main thing is being brought to the forefront – what good will return from judetses to raions bring to population and economy, which is – as well known – primary. 

Territorial administration is not an easy task. Countries of Europe (that is called “Europe of regions”) accumulated vast experience in this regard – in legislation, division of budgets, using funds for employment promotion, infrastructure reconstruction and environment improvement. 

We, who live in the Republic of Moldova, are still to overpass this way. Situation is being aggravated by that since the very beginning and further, over fifty years the republic (MSSR) was guided by the branch-like principle of planning, allocation of resources and administration under multiple (no less than 10 times!) reshaping of its administrative and territorial division. After 1991, when omnipotent Gosplan and branch ministries faded, territories still got neither rights nor real economic basis in form of municipal property or sufficient local budget revenues. 

Orienting itself at European standards of local self-government, Moldova’s Parliament ratified during 1997-1998 the European chart of local self-government and through introduction of judetses consolidated the country’s administrative and territorial division. It was hoped that there would be benefits from potential of larger regions. Later on, though followed changes rather formal than essential. Besides, due to sharp expansion of state apparatus of the higher, national level, it has also happened at the local one. 

Despite transition to the market economy, local authorities did not find any specific stimuli for entrepreneurship development (except for personal participation). Indicators of this drama areas follows: 68% of enterprises and 57% of financial assets turnover of SME are registered in the Chisinau municipality – closer to the Parliament and Government, tax and customs departments, licensing chamber, etc. 

What is to wait for now, given the return to raions? The Government recalling its promise to cut down expenditures approved on June 10, 2003 structure and personnel of raion, municipality and community administrations so far. At that, as the Prime-Minister said “in order to increase their efficiency we will also resort to dismissal, but it will be done under the legislation”. Let us hope that more essential changes in rights and functions of local administration will follow, first of all as regards local socio-economic development. 

Otherwise we will not avoid another wave of “consolidation-fragmentation“, as it has already happened in the past. Indeed, history teaches that it teaches us nothing: 

- May 1948: the second session of the Supreme Soviet of the MSSR abolished judetses and established 60 raions on the republic’s territory;

- The 50s: number of raions decreased, at first down to 46 (1950) and later – to 35 (1959). At the same time, it was considered expedient to unite raions into 4 circuits (Baltsi, Chisinau, Tiraspol and Cahul). By the way, the present building of the Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Moldova was meant for the circuit administration;

- 1963: instead of large circuits, though, at the time of permanent reorganizations of N. Khrushchev there took place abrupt consolidation of raions and decrease of their number to 18;

- but, in the next year already a new wave of fragmentation followed: 1964 – 26, 1996 – 31, 1972 – 33 and 40 raions in the 80s;

- 1990: Supreme Soviet of the SSR of Moldova, based on Declaration of sovereignty, approved Statute on improvement of the country’s administrative  and territorial division and charged the Committee on issues of local self-government “present proposals” starting from necessity to have territorial units (judetses, traditional for Bessarabia) with capacious demographic potential and capable financial and economic basis; the Planning research institute substantiated to the Government four variants: 7, 9, 12 or 18 judetses (and seven years later one of them served as the basis);

- 1998: restoration of judetses (10 units), plus ATU Gagauzia; Transnistria has kept 5 raions;

- 2003: return to raions (32), plus ATU Gagauzia (3 internal raions) and 5 raions in Transnistria.

In soviet times, postulate on “unity of political and economic raion administration, which is a junction point where directives of the party and Soviet power are executed” (CPSU in resolutions and decisions of congresses and conferences, volume 4, p. 234) served as an ideological consecration of “consolidations-fragmentations. When raions were consolidated, it was meant to “cut down state apparatus expenditures” and when they were fragmented – “to bring authority closer to the people”. During 2001-2002 the authorities while substantiating refusal from judetses and return to more fragmented raions produced both (!) these arguments! 

It is desirable that it will be that way. But it can be only achieved through refusal from strict centralization and administration, while developing municipalities and raions as self-governing economic communities, susceptible to entrepreneurial initiative and social innovations. 

Small potential of each of 40 new/old raions (including Transnistria and Gagauzia) can be compensated – ad exemplum of Poland, Czech Republic, Romania and Bulgaria – through exarticulation of 4-5 “regions of development” (North, Center, Southeast, South and Chisinau municipality) on the country’s territory, which economic peculiarities, transport benefits, demographic and industrial potential would allow realization – within the concrete strategy for each programmed region – of large projects of national importance, including with attraction of credits, investments and technical aid both from the CIS countries and European Union. 

Stable – for the nearest 10-15 years – combination of economic and administrative division into raions of the country can let us avoid new forcible decisions on number, composition and boundaries of raions, and functions of local development administration will gain a real economic basis and specific social environment.