porto pg. 53-58

8/12/2019 Porto pg. 53-58

1/6

The quality of life at commons level

in Romanian rural areas

NECULAI CRISTINA

Associate Researcher in the Empirical studies and surveys DepartmentInstitute for Economic Forecasting050711, Bucharest, Casa Academiei, 13 Septembrie Street no.13, 5 District

[email protected]

Abstract: In this research, we are building an aggregate index of quality of life which measures the level of

quality of life for each common. This index is built on a set of "twenty" indicators and on "three" economicdimensions: infrastructure dimension, social services dimension and diversification of the rural economydimension. Also, we grouping the commons in clusters by the economic dimensions (diversification of ruraleconomy, infrastructure (public utility) and social services (education and health)) and by the quality of life

level (expressed by an aggregate indexof quality of life).

Key-Words: Romanian rural areas, common level, diversification of the rural economy, infrastructuredimension, social services dimension, quality of life

1 IntroductionAt European level, through the monitoring programof quality of life of the "European Foundation forthe Improvement of Living and WorkingConditions" has outlined a support at Europeanlevel, approach to quality of life produced the best

scientific foundation to the present, being rejecteddifferent paradigm which diminishes the

semnification of quality of life, either by reducing itto certain living conditions (income, livingstandards), or to the subjective dimension of

researching of perceptions and satisfaction of livingconditions, possibly by limiting the analysis to the

study of happiness.In current approaches [1], the reflecting of the

quality of life (through the social policies) concerns:

-opportunity for people to live a long life in

health. Ability to function, participate and liveindependently in society;

-access to an adequate income and an standard ofliving that can create opportunity to participate insociety and make choices on how people want tolive life;

-the ability for people to enjoy of contructiverelationships, which gives them a sense of

belonging in: family, community and workplace.Quality of life is a function of peoples life

circumstances, which have an economic dimension,but also includes their social networks and the

sustainably of the environment on which they depend.

The dimensions of quality of life in rural areasare: the socio-cultural and services, theenvironmental, the economic. Governancecan thus be considered as an additional fourthdimension of quality of life. Of the four dimensionsof quality of life, in this research, we will focus onthe economic dimension.

Quality of life, from an economic perspective, isa combination of liveability (the services,environmental quality and social networks thatmaket rural areas places in which people want tolive) and livelihoods(how people gain livelihoodsand diversifing their land-based and otheractivitiesto sustain those livelihoods) [2].

The main components of the economic dimensionof quality of life which aimed developing of rural areasare the folowing: developing non-agricultural activities

(the diversify farming activities towards non-agricultural activities and the stimulating smallenterprises), the accessing of basic services (public

services) and development the infrastructure.The development of infrastructure (through

investments) and of the basic services are two keyfactors in improving the quality of life, through:

better living conditions for the population/

households, better development possibilities of ruraleconomy at local level (attraction of investors,creation of entrepreneurships, the role in a regionsability to keep citizens and to attract new ones), the

effects that have the access to education and tohealth on quality of life of population.

Recent Researches in Business and Economics

ISBN: 978-1-61804-102-9 53

8/12/2019 Porto pg. 53-58

2/6

The positive effects of increasing thediversification of rural economy on the quality of lifeoccur through the work factor as a major source ofincome, at population level and through obtaining theadeed gross value in terms of efficiency, at the local

level. Work is fundamentally important as a sourceof income, as a mechanism of social integration and asa basis for structuring workers lives[3].

At the EU level, three major objectives of therural policy development (Pillar 2 of CommonAgricultural Policy (CAP)) have been established,one of which is represented by the improvement of

the quality of life in rural areas and encouragingdiversification of economic activities [4].

Pillar 2 of Common Agricultural Policy (CAP)promoting the quality of life in rural areas, undersupport Axis 3 (general objective)The quality of life in

rural areas and diversification of the rural economy. Acentral objective of Axis 3 is to have a living

countryside and to help maintain and improve the socialand economic fabric, in particular in the more remoterural areas facing depopulation. Therefore, investment

in the broader rural economy and rural communities isvital to increase the quality of life in rural areas, via

improved access to basic services and infrastructure andto a better environment[5].

In Romania, the economic dimension of quality oflife which aimed the rural areas and its developmentthere are reflected in the "National Rural

Development Programme 2007 - 2013" under supportAxis 3 (general objective) "The quality of life in ruralareas and diversification of the rural economy"[6].

The convergence of the Romanian rural area inthe European one, requires, on the one hand, themodernization of Romanian agriculture and, on theother hand, making compatible the social,

economical and environmental Romanian structuresand processes with the European ones [7]. This

process assumes, inter alia, reducing disparitiesbetween counties and the balanced economic social development of counties, including the

development of infrastructure and services,diversification of rural economy.

Economic, social and environmental issuesregarding the Romanian rural areas are synthesizedin rural development objectives and theirachievement through the spending of the fundsallocated by PAC represent the opportunities foreconomic and social development of the rural areas,in 2007-2013 period.

As an answer to the present economical situation,the planned resources (by objectives of ruraldevelopment/axis and measures) in the NationalRural Development Program of Romania (also, forevery EU member state) were supplemented through

the European Plan of Economical Recovery (EPER)(that offers an anti-cyclic macroeconomic answer tothe crisis, as an ensemble of support actions of thereal economy). Through the European Plan ofEconomical Recovery, the supplementary funds are

allocated for new challenges [8] (ex. climaticchanges, renewable energy, water resourcesmanagement, biodiversity, restructuring of the dairysector and the broadband internet infrastructure).

Reducing differences in economic, social andenvironmental development between commons and

between counties, can be achieved through the

construction of public policies that take into accountthe level of development of Romanian ruralcommunities in terms of infrastructure, publicservices, diverisification of the rural economy.

2 Methodological aspects of researchStages of research are folowing:1.

building an aggregate index of quality of lifewhich expresses the level of quality of life foreach common and, through aggregation, for eachcounty (the Romanian rural areas at NUTS 3level) of Romanian rural areas;

2. grouping the commons by the economicdimensions: diversification of rural economydimension, infrastructure (public utility)dimension and social services (education and

health) dimension;3. grouping the commons by the level of quality of

life (expressed by an aggregate index) based (built)on three economic dimensions: diversification ofrural economy, infrastructure (public utility) andsocial services (education and health);

4. graphical representation on maps of theRomanian rural areas by the aggregate index of

quality of life and by the economic dimensions.

1. Building an aggregate index of quality of lifewhich expresses the level of quality of life for eachcommon and, through aggregation, for each county

(the Romanian rural areas at NUTS 3 level) ofRomanian rural areas

a) Creating the indicators for construction of theaggregate index of quality of life, based onobservation of the variables in "Database on

communes", 2008 year.b)

Standardization of indicators through bringing on a

scale from 1 to 100 (with the formula "maximumutility" respectively of the deviation from theminimum value: I = (real value - minimum value) /

(maximum value-minimum value) * 100.c)

Creating the economic dimensions of quality of life

by grouping the indicators. For the construction of


ISBN: 978-1-61804-102-9 54

8/12/2019 Porto pg. 53-58

3/6

these dimensions we are considering: theidentification of common elements of indicators forto be represented by a common factor and thearithmetic mean of the indicators. The economicdimensions built for each common are:

- diversification of rural economy dimension,which is created based on indicators: the shareof employees of each sector of nationaleconomy in total employees. The variablesused are: employees of the following sectors ofeconomy: industry, mining, manufacturing,electricity, gas and water, construction, trade,transport and postal, public administration,education, health and social care, financial,

banking and insurance and total employees;

- infrastructure (by public utility) dimension,which is created based on indicators:

distribution network of drinking water per 1000inhabitants, sewerage network per 1000inhabitants, natural gas distribution network per1000 inhabitants. The variables used are: lengthof the water supply network, length ofsewerage network, simple lenght of natural gasdistribution pipelines, the total population(stable) of the common;

- social services (education and health)

dimension, which is created based onindicators: pupils enrolled in primary andsecondary education sistem per teacher, pupils

enrolled in high-school per teacher, pupilsenrolled in arts and crafts education sistem per

teacher, the population per doctor (publicsector). The variables used are: pupils enrolledin primary and secondary education system,

pupils enrolled in high-school, pupils enrolledin arts and crafts education system, teachersenrolled in primary and secondary educationsystem, teachers enrolled in high-school,teachers enrolled in arts and crafts educationsystem, doctors (public sector), the total

population (stable).

d) Building an aggregate index of quality of life foreach common of database (2860 commons) and,through aggregation, for each county (41counties) of Romanian rural areas. This indexexpresses the level of quality of life for eachcommon and for each county of database and iscalculated as the arithmetic mean of theeconomic dimensions mentioned above. Theindex is a measure instrument with valencedefined, essentially, by the purpose for which itwas built," namely the quality of life level for

each of the county (the Romanian rural areas atNUTS 3 level) [9].

2. Grouping the commons in clusters by theeconomic dimensions: diversification of ruraleconomy dimension, infrastructure (public utility)dimension and social services (education and health)dimension)

For grouping the commons in clusters by theeconomic dimensions of the quality of life level, weused the Cluster analysis and K Means method [10].The Cluster analysis uses as imput data the researchresults (the economic dimensions) which was obtainedin the first stage of research (through construction ofthe aggregate index of quality of life).

3. Grouping the commons in clusters by thequality of life level (expressed by an aggregate indexof quality of life) based/built on three economicdimensions (diversification of rural economydimension, infrastructure (public utility) dimension,

social services (education and health) dimension)For grouping the commons in clusters by the

quality of life level (expressed by an aggregate indexof quality of life), we used the Cluster analysis and theK Means method. The Cluster analysis uses as

imput data the research results which was obtainedin the first stage of research (through construction of

the aggregate index of quality of life).

3 Research results1. The quality of life level (expressed by an

aggregate index of quality of life) at the county level(the Romanian rural areas at NUT3 level)

The data of quality of life level (expressed by anaggregate index of quality of life) at the county levelwere obtained through the aggregation of variablesfrom commune level (the number of 2860

communes) to the county level (41 counties).The aggregation of variables from commune

level to the county level reveals the folowing:

- the minimum values of the level of quality oflife (expressed by an aggregate index of qualityof life) varies between 2.805627 in countyValcea and 9.426143 in county Sibiu;

- the maximum values of the level of quality oflife (expressed by an aggregate index of qualityof life) varies between 16.633543 in countyGiurgiu and 43.934375 in county Bistrita;

- the mean values of the level of quality of life(expressed by an aggregate index of quality oflife) varies between 10.31447949 in county

Dolj and 17.93668393 in county Harghita.

2. Grouping the commons in clusters by the

economic dimensions: diversification of ruraleconomy dimension, infrastructure (public utility)


ISBN: 978-1-61804-102-9 55

8/12/2019 Porto pg. 53-58

4/6

dimension and social services (education and health)dimension

Grouping the commons in clusters by theeconomic dimensions (diversification of ruraleconomy dimension, infrastructure (public utility)

dimension and social services (education and health)dimension) is mentioned in Table 1.

Table 1Grouping the commons in clusters by the economic

dimensions in Romanian rural areas, 2008 year

Indicators

Economic dimensions

Infrastructure

D

iversificatio

nofrural

economy

Social

services

Mean 71.82 20.11 7.96

No commons 15 15 15

Std. Dev. 15.42 6.31 4.01

Mean 3.21 15.21 23.59

No commons 477 477 477

Std. Dev. 3.67 3.85 5.01

Mean 1.88 23.54 14.43


Std. Dev. 3.16 3.69 4.13

Mean 9.33 37.47 11.76

No commons 76 76 76

Std. Dev. 8.79 6.75 4.19

Mean 1.74 13.55 12.79


Std. Dev. 2.40 3.45 3.60

Mean 21.31 16.02 12.88


Std. Dev. 3.77 4.79 4.26

Mean 37.28 16.42 12.72


Std. Dev. 6.55 6.17 4.54

Mean 12.07 13.61 15.18


Std. Dev. 2.88 3.83 4.30

Mean 8.78 16.58 15.34

No commons 2860 2860 2860

Std. Dev. 10.87 6.40 5.72

Source: the "Database on communes", 2008 year.

Note: Grouping the commons in clusters by theeconomic dimensions based on statistical datafrom the "Database on communes", 2008 yearThe economic dimensions are: diversificationof rural economy dimension, infrastructure(public utility) dimension and social services(education and health) dimension

Grouping the commons in clusters by the

economic dimensions (diversification of ruraleconomy dimension, infrastructure (public utility)dimension and social services (education and health)dimension) reveals the following:

the highest level of development for all three

dimensions analyzed is for the group 1 which iscomposed of 15 commons. So, there is: a mean of

71.82 for public infrastructure dimension , a mean

of 20.11 for diversification of rural economydimension (expressed by employment structure)and a mean of 7.95 for public utility services(education and health) dimension;

the highest level of homogeneity for all threedimensions analyzed is for the cluster 5, which iscomposed of 726 commons. So, there is: astandard deviation of 2.403 for publicinfrastructure dimension, a standard deviation of

3.4446 for diversification of economy dimension(expressed by employment structure) and a

standard deviation of 3.602 for public utility

services (education and health) dimension.

3. Grouping the commons in clusters by the level ofquality of life (expressed by an aggregate index of quality

of life) based/built on the three economic dimensions:diversification of rural economy dimension, infrastructuredimension and social dimension

Grouping the commons in clusters by anaggregate index of quality of life (the level of

quality of life) based on the three economicdimensions (diversification of rural economydimension, infrastructure dimension and social

dimension) are mentioned in Table 2.

Table 2Grouping the commons in clusters by the quality of

life level in Romanian rural areas, 2008 year

Number

of

Clusters

Mean

No

commons

Std.

Deviation

1 26.27 56 2.06

2 10.42 631 0.693 12.61 681 0.61


ISBN: 978-1-61804-102-9 56

8/12/2019 Porto pg. 53-58

5/6

Number

of

Clusters

Mean

No

commons

4 17.11 395

5 7.84 312

6 35.61 11

7 14.73 575

8 20.61 199

Total 13.56 2.86

Source: the "Database on communes

Note: Grouping the commons in clquality of life level based on stfrom the "Database on communes",

The quality of life level is expr

aggregate index of quality of lithree economic dimensions (divof rural economy dimension, indimension and social dimension)

Grouping the commons in cl

aggregate index of quality of lifollowing:

- the highest level of developquality of life level is in cluscomposed of 11 commons

compared to the level of dothers clusters in Romania;

- the lowest level of developmentlife level is in cluster 5 which is ccommons (Mean 7.84) compareddevelopment for others clusters in

- the greatest degree of homoquality of life level is in cluscomposed of 681 commDeviation 0.60);

- the lowest degree of homogeneiof life level is in cluster 6 whi

of 11 commons (Standard Devia

4. Graphical representation on maps

by the economic dimensions in RomaniaThe rural areas by three rang

medium level and low level)differences induced by dimensionsthe aggregate index are represented o- by the infrastructure (public uti

(Figure 1);

- by diversification of rural econ(Figure 2);

-

by social services (educatiodimension (Figure 3).

Std.

Deviation

0.81

1.35

3.74

0.64

1.20

4.15

, 2008 year.

sters by thetistical data2008 year

ssed by an

e based onersificationfrastructure

usters by the

e reveals the

ent of the ofter 6 which is(Mean 35.61)

velopment for

f the quality ofomposed of 312

to the level ofRomania;

eneity of theter 3 which isns (Standard

y of the qualityh is composed

tion 3.74).

of the rural areas

n rural areas.s (high level,according thewhich formingn maps, thus:lity) dimension

my dimension

and health)

FiguInfrastructure (publi

FiguDiversification of rura

FiguSocial services(ed

dime

e 1utility) dimension

e 2l economydimension

e 3cationand health)sion


ISBN: 978-1-61804-102-9 57

8/12/2019 Porto pg. 53-58

6/6

4 Conclusions1. In the Romanian rural areas at common level

there is a number of eight clusters by the quality oflife level (expressed by an aggregate index ofquality of life) and by the economic dimensions

(diversification of rural economy dimension,infrastructure (public utility) dimension and socialservices (education and health) dimension).

2. As of any other country in the EU - 27,improvement the quality of life level in Romanianrural areas can be achieved through efficiencyimplementation of measures under Axis 3 support"The quality of life in rural areas and diversificationof the rural economy", which is part of the "NationalRural Development Programme 2007 - 2013". Inthis statement, we consider that is necessary:

- reducing the gaps between the level of quality of

life level between commons and betweencounties, through improvment the all economicdimensions of quality of life (infrastructuredimension, social dimension and diversificationof rural economy dimension);

- improvement the public infrastructuredimension, especially for the cluster 5 which iscomposed by 726 commons (mean 1.73);

- improvement the public services dimension,especially for the cluster 5 which is composed

by 726 commons (mean 13.55);

- improvement the diversification of economydimension for the cluster 1 which is composed

by 15 commons (mean 7.95);

- improvement the the quality of life levelespecially for the cluster 5 which is composed

by 312 commons (mean 7.84).

3. Reducing differences in economic, social andenvironmental development between commons and

between counties, can be achieved through theconstruction of public policies that take into accountthe level of development of Romanian rural

communities in terms of infrastructure, publicservices, diverisification of the rural economy.

AcknowledgementsThis paper is suported by the Sectorial

Operational Programme Human ResourcesDevelopment (SOPHRD), financed from theEuropean Social Fund and by the Romanian

Government under the contract number SOPHRD/89/1.5/S/62988. Titles and intellectual andindustrial property rights on the results of the post-doctoral research programme belong to The

National Institute of Economic Research "Costin C.

Kiriescu of the Romanian Academy.

References:[1]

Marginean I., Precupetu I., Quality of life and

sustainable development, Policies tostrengthen social cohesion, Expert Publisher,

2008, pp.14-pp.14.[2]

European Communities - EuropeanEvaluation Network for Rural Development,

Capturing impacts of Leader and of measuresto improve quality of life in rural areas, 2010.

[3]

Alber J., Fahey T., Perceptions of livingconditionsn an enlarged Europe, 2004, pp.

51- pp. 51.[4] European Union Council, Regulation no.

1698 on support for rural development byEuropean Agricultural Fund for RuralDevelopment, 2005, pp. 9- pp. 9.

[5] European Commission, EU RuralDevelopment Policy 20072013, 2008, pp.14- pp. 14.

[6] Ministry of Agriculture and RuralDevelopment, National Rural Development

Programme 2007 2013 for Romania, 2011,pp.72 - pp.72.

[7] Neculai C., Diversification of economy andthe development of infrastructure: vectors ofdevelopment for the rural area and forimproving the quality of life of ruralpopulation, 2011, pp. 173- pp. 173.

[8] Commission of the European CommunitiesBrussels, An European Economic RecoveryPlan, 2008, p.5 5

[9]

Dumitru S., Social Disparities in the RegionalDevelopment and Policies of Romania,

International Review of Social Research,2011, pp.4 - pp.4.

[10] Traian R. (coordinator), Statistical methods

applied insocialsciences, Polirom Publisher,2009.

[11] National Institute of Statistics from Romania,

"Database on communes", 2008.


ISBN: 978-1-61804-102-9 58

porto pg. 53-58

Documents