IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rom/terumm/v6y2011i4p5-19.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Gis Assessment Of Development Gaps Among Romanian Administrative Units

Author

Listed:
  • Sorin Daniel MANOLE

    (Constantin Brâncoveanu University, Calea Bascovului 2A, 110095, Pitesti, Romania)

  • Alexandru-Ionut PETRISOR

    (Ion Mincu University of Architecture and Urbanism, Academiei 18-20, 010014, Bucharest,)

  • Antonio TACHE

    (National Institute for Research and Development URBAN INCERC, Nicolae Filipescu 53-55, 020961, Bucharest, Romania)

  • Ecaterina PÂRVU

    (National Institute for Research and Development URBAN INCERC, Nicolae Filipescu 53-55, 020961, Bucharest, Romania,)

Abstract

A new set of indices for monitoring the effects of implementing new regional development policies of the European Union, as well as other sectoral policies with territorial effects, resulted into the creation of new flexible systems, able to increase the administrative capacity to access structural and cohesion funds. The novelty of this study consists of the original methodology embedding mathematical methods (i.e., the ELECTRE and the index of development methods) in a GIS in order to produce hierarchies of the territorial indices at the NUTS levels III and V, displayed as charts and maps underlining the disparities between the socioeconomic, cultural and environmental aspects of the development. Our results suggest that the Romanian poorly developed egions are located in the south. Methodologically, the potential of the approach eveloped by this study recommends its usage as a planning tool of regional evelopment. The limitations are due to the sparse monitoring and lack of data covering Romania.

Suggested Citation

  • Sorin Daniel MANOLE & Alexandru-Ionut PETRISOR & Antonio TACHE & Ecaterina PÂRVU, 2011. "Gis Assessment Of Development Gaps Among Romanian Administrative Units," Theoretical and Empirical Researches in Urban Management, Research Centre in Public Administration and Public Services, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 6(4), pages 5-19, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:rom:terumm:v:6:y:2011:i:4:p:5-19
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://um.ase.ro/no64/1.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hjollund, L. & Svendsen, G.T., 2000. "Social Capital: A Standard Method of Measurement," Papers 00-9, Aarhus School of Business - Department of Economics.
    2. Zanakis, Stelios H. & Solomon, Anthony & Wishart, Nicole & Dublish, Sandipa, 1998. "Multi-attribute decision making: A simulation comparison of select methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 107(3), pages 507-529, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Krejci, Igor & Voriskova, Andrea, 2010. "Analysis of the Method for the Selection of Regions with Concentrated State Aid," AGRIS on-line Papers in Economics and Informatics, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Faculty of Economics and Management, vol. 2(3), pages 1-8, September.
    2. Kokaraki, Nikoleta & Hopfe, Christina J. & Robinson, Elaine & Nikolaidou, Elli, 2019. "Testing the reliability of deterministic multi-criteria decision-making methods using building performance simulation," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 991-1007.
    3. Mulliner, Emma & Smallbone, Kieran & Maliene, Vida, 2013. "An assessment of sustainable housing affordability using a multiple criteria decision making method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 270-279.
    4. Manel Baucells & Rakesh K. Sarin, 2003. "Group Decisions with Multiple Criteria," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(8), pages 1105-1118, August.
    5. Hajkowicz, Stefan & Higgins, Andrew, 2008. "A comparison of multiple criteria analysis techniques for water resource management," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 184(1), pages 255-265, January.
    6. Anneli Kaasa & Eve Parts, 2007. "Individual-Level Determinants Of Social Capital In Europe: Differences Between Country Groups," University of Tartu - Faculty of Economics and Business Administration Working Paper Series 56, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, University of Tartu (Estonia).
    7. Raja Rub Nawaz & Dr.Rafique Ahmed & Sajida Reza, 2015. "Prioritization Of Quality Care Criteria To Deliver Quality Service Using Dematel," IBT Journal of Business Studies (JBS), Ilma University, Faculty of Management Science, vol. 11(2), pages 165-181.
    8. Muge Akin & Tamer Topal & Steven Kramer, 2013. "A newly developed seismic microzonation model of Erbaa (Tokat, Turkey) located on seismically active eastern segment of the North Anatolian Fault Zone (NAFZ)," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 65(3), pages 1411-1442, February.
    9. Ginés de Rus & Javier Campos & Daniel Graham & M. Pilar Socorro & Jorge Valido, 2020. "Evaluación Económica de Proyectos y Políticas de Transporte: Metodología y Aplicaciones. Parte 1: Metodología para el análisis coste-beneficio de proyectos y políticas de transporte," Working Papers 2020-11, FEDEA.
    10. Patelli, Edoardo & Feng, Geng & Coolen, Frank P.A. & Coolen-Maturi, Tahani, 2017. "Simulation methods for system reliability using the survival signature," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 327-337.
    11. Brett Bryan & John Kandulu, 2011. "Designing a Policy Mix and Sequence for Mitigating Agricultural Non-Point Source Pollution in a Water Supply Catchment," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 25(3), pages 875-892, February.
    12. Shih, Hsu-Shih, 2008. "Incremental analysis for MCDM with an application to group TOPSIS," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 186(2), pages 720-734, April.
    13. Janis Edmunds Daugavietis & Raimonda Soloha & Elina Dace & Jelena Ziemele, 2022. "A Comparison of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Methods for Sustainability Assessment of District Heating Systems," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-23, March.
    14. Roman Vavrek, 2019. "Evaluation of the Impact of Selected Weighting Methods on the Results of the TOPSIS Technique," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(06), pages 1821-1843, November.
    15. Sarita Gajbhiye Meshram & Vijay P. Singh & Ercan Kahya & Ehsan Alvandi & Chandrashekhar Meshram & Shailesh Kumar Sharma, 2020. "The Feasibility of Multi-Criteria Decision Making Approach for Prioritization of Sensitive Area at Risk of Water Erosion," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 34(15), pages 4665-4685, December.
    16. Karatas, Mumtaz & Sulukan, Egemen & Karacan, Ilknur, 2018. "Assessment of Turkey's energy management performance via a hybrid multi-criteria decision-making methodology," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 890-912.
    17. Gutiérrez Sanín, Francisco, 2009. "The quandaries of coding and ranking: evaluating poor state performance indexes," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 28483, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    18. Chang, Yu-Hern & Yeh, Chung-Hsing, 2001. "Evaluating airline competitiveness using multiattribute decision making," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 29(5), pages 405-415, October.
    19. Bottani, Eleonora & Rizzi, Antonio, 2008. "An adapted multi-criteria approach to suppliers and products selection--An application oriented to lead-time reduction," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(2), pages 763-781, February.
    20. Jaroslav Myšiak, 2006. "Consistency of the Results of Different MCA Methods: A Critical Review," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 24(2), pages 257-277, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rom:terumm:v:6:y:2011:i:4:p:5-19. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Colesca Sofia (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ccasero.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.