ROMANIA Romania Mountain Area Development Support (P176070) Output 3 – Ex-ante report on the impact of proposed public policies/measures on mountain area development November 2023 Disclaimer This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank. The findings, interpretation, and conclusions expressed in this paper do not necessarily reflect the views of the Executive Directors of the World Bank or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work and does not assume responsibility for any errors, omissions, or discrepan- cies in the information, or liability with respect to the use of or failure to use the information, methods, processes, or conclusions set forth. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other in- formation shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. This report does not necessarily represent the position of the European Union or the Romanian Gov- ernment. Copyright Statement The material in this publication is copyrighted. Copying and/or transmitting portions of this work without permission may be a violation of applicable laws. For permission to photocopy or reprint any part of this work, please send a request with the complete information to either: Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (Carol I Blvd, No. 2-4, Sector 3, Bucharest, Romania); or (ii) the World Bank Group Romania (Vasile Lascăr Street, No 31, Et 6, Sector 2 Bucharest, Romania). This report has been delivered under the Reimbursable Advisory Services Agreement on Romania Mountain Area Development Support (P176070) signed between the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development on November 25, 2021. It corresponds to Output No.3 under the above-mentioned agreement. Acknowledgments The overall coordination for the preparation of this document was led by Luz Berania Diaz Rios (Senior Agribusiness Specialist, Agriculture Global Practice, Task Team Lead) under the overall guidance of Frauke Jungbluth (Practice Manager, Agriculture and Food Global Practice, Europe and Central Asia Region) and Anna Akhalkatsi (Country Manager Romania). The lead authors of the report are Erich Dallhammer (Spatial Planning and Planner Development and M&E Expert) and Roland Gaugitsch (Regional Policy and Landscape Planning Expert). Cristina Zamfir (Urban Development Specialist) and Adina Păsărel (EU Programs, Policies and Institu- tions Expert, SCAAG) and provided insights and comments on draft versions of the document. Alina Ionita and Alina Alexa (Rural Development Experts) provided facilitation of stakeholder workshops. Sincere gratitude to the team appointed by the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MARD), as well as from the National Mountain Area Agency (NMAA/ANZM) and to all stakeholders for their invaluable contribution to the preparation of this document. 2 Contents 1 Introduction 6 2 The need for a Mountain Integrated Strategy and problems addressed 7 2.1 Description of the current situation – problem definition 7 2.1.1 Process developing the problem definition 7 2.1.2 Review of challenges for mountain areas in Europe in general and Romania specifically 10 2.1.3 Prioritization of challenges 20 2.2 Expected changes – theory of change and coherence 22 2.2.1 Theory of change and relevance 23 2.2.2 Internal coherence of the strategy 27 2.2.3 External coherence 31 3 Socioeconomic impact 34 3.1 Methodological approach of the assessment of socioeconomic impacts 34 3.1.1 Territorial impact assessment supplemented by literature-based analysis 34 3.1.2 Territorial impact assessment workshop 35 3.1.3 Limitations of the outcome 37 3.2 General description of the estimated benefits and costs as a result of the entry into force of the normative act 37 3.3 Social impact (including impact on fundamental human rights and freedoms) 37 3.3.1 Reducing population loss in mountainous areas 37 3.3.2 Connectivity 41 3.3.3 Healthcare 43 3.3.4 Educational attainment 44 3.4 The macroeconomic impact (including the impact on the business environment) 45 3.4.1 Agriculture, Forestry and Industry 45 3.4.2 Territorial effects on tourism 49 3.4.3 Attracting investments from outside 54 3.4.4 Higher public income 54 3.5 The impact on the environment 54 3.6 Assessing the costs and benefits from the perspective of innovation and digitization 54 3.7 Other information 55 3.7.1 Increasing implementation capacities trough governance 55 3.7.2 Improved access to finance and investment opportunities 56 4 The financial impact of the Strategy 58 4.1 General recommendations for implementing the strategy 58 4.2 Funding review and input provided to the strategy 59 4.3 Possible Sources of Financing 59 4.3.1 EU Funds 60 4.3.2 EU – National level programs under the Partnership Agreement (Cohesion Policy) 61 4.3.3 PNS 2023-2027 66 4.3.4 NRRP/PRRN 67 4.3.5 National sources 67 5 Measures regarding the implementation, monitoring and evaluation of the Strategy 69 5.1 Proposed indicator framework 69 5.2 Indicators 69 5.3 Mechanisms for Monitoring the Proposed Strategy 75 5.3.1 Institutional responsibilities for Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) 75 3 5.3.2 Annual Implementation Reports 76 5.3.3 Setting up the Monitoring System 77 5.3.4 Interim and Final Evaluations 78 5.3.5 Updating the Proposed Strategy 79 Sources 80 Annex A: Methodological approach for prioritization of challenges 84 Annex B: Measures and Operational Indicators 91 List of Figures Figure 1. Tree cover development – stock, loss between 2000-2022 and gains between 2000-2020 12 Figure 2. Index of Spatial Accessibility concerning hospitals 15 Figure 3. People at risk of poverty or social exclusion, in percentage (grouped in cities, towns plus suburbs and rural areas) in 2021 19 Figure 4. Policy layers 32 Figure 5. Workshop findings: Systemic picture 35 Figure 6. Exposure x territorial sensitivity = territorial impact 36 Figure 7. Result of the expert judgement: Migration rate 39 Figure 8. Result of the expert judgement: Young demography 40 Figure 9. Result of the expert judgement: Public transport uptake 42 Figure 10. Result of the expert judgement: Doctors available 43 Figure 11. Result of the expert judgement: Employers – Agriculture, Forestry, Industry 46 Figure 12. Result of the expert judgement: Entrepreneurship – Agriculture, Forestry, Industry 48 Figure 13. Result of the expert judgement: Overnight stays in hotels/capita 50 Figure 14. Result of the expert judgement: Turnover in the hotels and restaurants sector 51 Figure 15. Result of the expert judgement: Employers – Hotels and restaurants 53 Figure 16. Result of the expert judgement: Funding from national programs cleared 57 Figure 17. European Funds to Romania, 2023-2027 61 List of Maps Map 1. Migration rate – expert judgement: Strong advantageous effect 39 Map 2. Young demography – expert judgement: Strong advantageous effect 40 Map 3. Public transport uptake – expert judgement: Strong advantageous effect 42 Map 4. Doctors available – expert judgement: Strong advantageous effect 44 Map 5. Employment – Agriculture, Forestry, Industry – expert judgement: Strong advantageous effect 47 Map 6. Entrepreneurship – Agriculture, Forestry, Industry – expert judgement: Strong advantageous effect 48 Map 7. Overnight stays in hotels/capita – expert judgement: Strong advantageous effect 50 Map 8. Turnover in the hotels and restaurants sector – expert judgement: Strong advantageous effect 52 Map 9. Employment – Hotels and restaurants – expert judgement: Strong advantageous effect 53 Map 10. Funding from national programs cleared – expert judgement: Strong advantageous effect 57 4 Abbreviations and Acronyms ATUs/LAUs Administrative Territorial Units/Local Administrative Units CAP Common Agriculture Policy EU European Union EUR Euro GDP Gross Domestic Product IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change LRAs Local and Regional Authorities NACE Nomenclature statistique des Activités économiques dans la Communauté Européenne Statistical Classification of Economic Activities in the European Community OIR Austrian Institute for Spatial Planning (ÖIR) PPS Purchasing Power Standard RAS Reimbursable Advisory Services RON Romanian leu TIA Territorial Impact Assessment 5 1 Introduction This report represents “Output 3 – Ex-ante report on the impact of proposed public policies/measures on mountain area development” under the Reimbursable Advisory Services Agreement (RAS) Romania Mountain Area Development Support. The report covers: • Review and refinement of the problem definition • Review of the scenario building and planning • Assessment of relevance, coherence, and efficiency of selected policy options under the with Strategy scenario • Assessment of potential territorial impacts of proposed Policy Options: social, economic, envi- ronmental and governance at territorial level • Guidance of a design of the M&E framework of the draft intended Strategy. • Recommendations on how to enhance the draft outline integrated Strategy, including to the Implementation Plan The preparation of the ex-ante has been carried out in parallel to the development of the Strategy, providing inputs to it during the process. Furthermore, the report has been structured along the guidance provided for Ex-Ante Assessments of legal acts according to Gov. Decision no. 379 of March 23, 20221. It provides the needed assessments to support the subsequent stages of Strategy approval/adoption, complementing relevant information for these purposes, also provided directly in the Strategy document. The report is linked to the application of the TIA Quick Check methodology and supporting tool de- veloped for Romania as a key element of the socio-economic impact assessment. The methodology applied is well established and has been implemented for a range of policies at European and Member State level. It is furthermore recognized by the EU Better Regulation Guidelines as one of the two recommended Territorial Impact Assessment methodologies. The report consolidates the input re- ceived from the participating experts and provides conclusions and recommendations developed by the TIA experts delivering the RAS. _ 1 HOTARARE 443 30/03/2022 – Portal Legislativ (just.ro) 6 2 The need for a Mountain Integrated Strategy and problems addressed 2.1 Description of the current situation – problem definition Methodological approach of the ex-ante assessment: The ex-ante assessment conducted an inde- pendent review of the relevant challenges, reflected this assessment with the identified challenge areas and problems, and on this basis provided a validation and recommendations for improvement. The main challenges for mountain regions in general and for Romania in particular were identified on the basis of desk research and diagnostic document review. The project team reviewed the doc- uments developed in the diagnostic phase and critically reflected on them with external sources. The review therefore included: • all diagnostic studies and results of stakeholder consultation carried out during the diagnostic phase of the project. These sources provided valuable insights into the challenges and concerns expressed by different stakeholders, ensuring that their perspectives were taken into account. • In addition to the diagnostic studies and stakeholder analyses, the project team screened for national and international strategies as well as a broader literature review of challenges faced by mountain regions in general, to ensure a comprehensive understanding of these issues. The triangulation of sources provided a comprehensive independent review of the problem defini- tion from an external perspective. The challenges identified in the review were mapped against the key problem areas identified in the strategy development. In addition, an assessment of the coher- ence of the key issues, causes and consequences, as well as the outline of the issues was carried out, and recommendations for improving coherence were made. In addition to desk review two workshops were done one in person with relevant stakeholders from central, regional and local public and private on September 21-22 (Transfagarasan Mountains, Sibiu County) and online technical discussions regarding possible funding options on November 6 with relevant central, regional and local EU financing stakeholders. Uptake of the recommendation: The review and triangulation showed that the challenges identi- fied are consistent with the independent review and are being addressed, so no general change to the challenge areas was recommended. Concrete suggestions were made for reformulating and im- proving the coherence of the problem definition and the key issues outlined made. The ex-ante recommendations were generally taken into account in the process and the resulting problem defi- nition is consistent with the external review. 2.1.1 Process developing the problem definition The problem definition was developed in a comprehensive process involving a range of independent studies investigating historical development and current status on a broad range of aspects. The process involved extensive desk research, interviews as well as stakeholder consultation activities, in order to ensure a comprehensive and complete picture relevant to mountain regions. This allowed the strategy development to deduce objectives and measures targeted at fostering the strengths and mitigating the weaknesses of the Mountain Area. 7 Extensive data collection and assessment activities including a broad range of indicators (e.g. eco- nomic, environmental and social indicators) set a solid baseline for the further activities. In total, 14 background studies and analyses were conducted in this framework: • Prospective Document Romania Mountain Area: Then and Now. • Romania Mountain Area Development Support – Romanian Mountain Area Diagnostic Report: Synopsis • Romania Mountain Area Development Support – Romanian Mountain Area Diagnostic Report (Full report) • Romania Mountain Area Development Support – Mountain Tourism: Deep Dive • Romania Mountain Area Development Support – Approaches to Support Downstream Value Chain Integration • Romania Mountain Area Development Support – Draft Guidance Note with good practice ap- proaches to stakeholder consultations • Romania Mountain Area Development Support – Review of Mountain Product Quality Scheme in Romania • Romania Mountain Area Development Support – Romania’s Mountain Natural Resources: Technical Assessment Report • Romania Mountain Area Development Support – Romanian Mountain Area Agri-food sector: A deep dive • Romania Mountain Area Development Support – Unleashing opportunities for the bioecon- omy in the mountain regions of Romania • Romania Mountain Area Development Support – Water Nitrate Pollution in Romanian Moun- tain Area • Massif Group Factsheets (socioeconomic and environmental data) • Socioeconomic Indicators Metadata for the Mountain Area • Environmental indicators Metadata for the Mountain Area In addition related to the topic of tourism, three case studies on “Via transilvanica”, “Gastronomy local point: Gastrolocal Vama Buzaului” and “Tara dornelor ecotourism destination” were conducted. Complementing the data driven approach applied in drafting the above reports and assessments, stakeholder engagement was emphasized strongly in the problem definition. Stakeholders from sec- toral backgrounds (e.g. Tourism), administrative backgrounds (e.g. National Mountain Agency) or lo- cal/regional backgrounds were involved in a series of workshops, amongst which the Territorial Im- pact Assessment workshops of key relevance for the development of the ex-ante assessment. These meetings were designed to capture the perspectives of community members, industry stakeholders, and government representatives. The strategy development team was involved in the facilitation of the strategy, ensuring a comprehensive understanding of the on-the-ground realities and assimilating this feedback into the analyses. Of note, not all meetings focused exclusively on the problem defini- tion but also provided feedback and gathered input on other aspects such as measures and actions as well as indicator development. The following stakeholder meetings in Bucharest and selected loca- tions in the Mountain Area (as well as online) were held from Oct. 6th, 2022 until November 7th, 2023: • Meeting stakeholders Tourism – MARD, Bucharest • Meeting with Mountain Area relevant stakeholders – Nicolesti – Harghita County • Meeting with Mountain Area relevant stakeholders – Lunca Ilvei – Bistrita County • Meeting DAJs – Online • Meeting Mountain farmers – Online 8 • Workshop with the staff of the National Mountain Area Agency – Vatra Dornei, Suceava County • Workshop Mountain Area relevant stakeholders – Baile Herculane, Caras Severin County • Workshop Mountain Area relevant stakeholders – Deva, Hunedoara, County • Workshop Research/academic institutions – Cristian Mountains Research Institute Sibiu, County • Workshop to co-create the vision and roadmap for the Strategy for the Integrated Develop- ment of Mountain Areas in Romania – Bucharest World Bank, office • Workshop to co-create the vision and roadmap for the Strategy for the Integrated Develop- ment of Mountain Areas in Romania – Apuseni Mountains, Zlatna, Alba County • Workshop- Ex-ante evaluation Strategy for the integrated development of mountain areas in Romania – Cartisoara, Sibiu County • Technical discussions on financing options for the Strategy for the integrated development of the mountain area in Romania ( Ex ante evaluation) – Online • Workshop – presentation of pillars and objectives of the Strategy for integrated develop- ment of the Mountain Area in Romania – Obarsia Lotrului, Valcea County Further complementing the stakeholder meetings conducted, a range of thematic online workshops (online) was implemented focusing on agricultural aspects involving mountain area farmers and the Agricultural Directorates of the counties. These workshops investigated particular aspects of farming such as pig farming, beekeeping or organic farming of relevance. The following workshops were con- ducted between January and February 2023: • January 26th, 2023, on the topic of meat production, with farmers, producers and other rel- evant stakeholders from the mountain area of Brașov and Prahova counties; • January 26th, 2023, on the topic of sheep farming, with farmers and other relevant stake- holders from the mountain area of Alba, Sibiu and Hunedoara counties; • February 1st, 2023, on the topic of beekeeping; with beekeepers and other relevant stake- holders from the mountain area of Vâlcea county; • February 1st, 2023 on the topic of cattle farming; with farmers and other relevant stake- holders from the mountain area of Harghita and Suceava counties; • February 2nd, 2023 on the topic of pig farming, with farmers and other relevant stakehold- ers from the mountain area of Arad, Hunedoara and Gorj counties; • February 2nd, 2023 on the topic of potato production, with farmers and other relevant stakeholders from the mountain area of Covasna county; • February 3rd, 2023 on the topic of fruit orchards, with farmers and other relevant stake- holders from the mountain area of Caraș-Severin and Mehedinți counties; • February 6th, 2023 on the topic of berry production, with farmers and other relevant stake- holders from the mountain area of Maramureș county; and • February 7th, 2023 on the topic of organic farming, with farmers and other relevant stake- holders for this topic from Cluj county. Finally, three surveys on the general topic of “perceptions of Mountain Area development”, the Mountain Product Labeling Scheme as well as a survey of Tourism Stakeholders were conducted. Overall, these surveys created a significant output of over 1,500 respondents. This allowed to further contextualise the answers received from stakeholder involvement and ultimately better reflect the challenges identified. 9 The resulting output of these extensive activities is the presented comprehensive problem definition. It can be considered a solid background for the ensuing strategy developments and ensures the strat- egy to be anchored in a sound assessment of the situation on the ground, the most relevant challenges as well as strengths. The extensive data-backing of the research as well as the community involve- ment are particularly positive, as these safeguard the applicability of the strategy in the respective regions. The review can underline the sound design of the process in developing the problem defini- tion, tapping on a broad array of sources and including extensive research. 2.1.2 Review of challenges for mountain areas in Europe in general and Romania specifically In order to reflect on the problem definition provided and the scenario developed, the ex-ante as- sessment has reviewed challenges relevant for mountain regions in general and Romania in particular. Based on this review, the completeness of the problem definition has been verified and the prioriti- zation of challenges could be reflected. The purpose of this task did not include a comprehensive reproduction of the diagnostic phase of the project, but rather provide external validation to the task undertaken. Therefore, a brief overview of the respective challenges and their relevance is presented below. For the purpose of validation through the ex-ante assessment, the main challenges for mountain regions in general and for Romania in particular were identified on the basis of desk research and document review. The project team reviewed the documents developed in the diagnostic phase and critically reflected on them with external sources. The review therefore included: • all diagnostic studies and results of stakeholder consultation carried out during the diagnostic phase of the project. These sources provided valuable insights into the challenges and concerns expressed by different stakeholders, ensuring that their perspectives were taken into account. • In addition to the diagnostic studies and stakeholder analyses, the project team screened for national and international strategies (going beyond mountain development) which are of rele- vance for the mountain regions. • Finally, the project team conducted a broader literature review of challenges faced by mountain regions in general, to ensure a comprehensive understanding of these issues. This broader per- spective allows us to reflect on main challenges beyond the Romanian perspective. The triangulation revealed that most of the challenges identified at the international level are also relevant for Romania. Indeed, some challenges seem to be more pronounced due to the different socio-economic structure of some regions. However, some challenges that are common to mountain regions, e.g. in the Alps, are less pronounced or relevant to only a few regions in the Romanian context. 2.1.2.1 Climate change European mountain areas are often disproportionally affected by climate change. This is both evident for mountainous ecosystems as well as existing economic structures. Because of the challenging ter- rain, both wildlife and humans needed to adapt to those conditions, leading to specialized environ- ments (e.g., strong focus on one economic sector) that are highly vulnerable to external changes (Terzi et al., 2019, p. 759). Disruptions to these unique ecosystems can also have severe conse- quences for surrounding areas. Increased natural disasters, droughts and shorter snow seasons pre- sent a threat to destabilize the current water flow, effecting agriculture and the usage of hydropower (Climate ADAPT, 2022). 10 Situation in Romania Romania’s Carpathian Mountains, like many European mountain areas, are increasingly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change, including increased landslides, extreme weather events, and significant tem- perature shifts. These changes pose serious threats to agriculture, forests, water resources and local livelihoods. While the National Strategy for Climate Adaptation is under public debate in Romania, local mobilization for climate change adaptation planning is still insufficient, and specific plans for disaster risk reduction by local authorities are lacking. However, there are opportunities for mitigation and in- creased resilience, such as forest conservation, climate-smart agriculture, stronger institutional frame- works and adaptation planning, etc. Despite the daunting challenges, proactive measures and adaptation strategies are critical for the mountain region to effectively respond to and combat the impacts of climate change. This response is particularly urgent given the unique vulnerabilities of the Carpathian ecosystems and economic structures, which, if disrupted, could have far-reaching consequences. • A study spanning from 1987 to 2018 has unveiled significant climate trends, notably showcasing a pronounced warming pattern in the southern Carpathian Mountains. While these mountainous regions are not the most severely affected areas in the country, Romania is susceptible to heat- waves and droughts, and climate change is intensifying their frequency. These changes are ex- pected to have repercussions on various aspects, including the survival of specific tree species, the productivity and stability of grasslands and the biodiversity they support, the availability of freshwater for households, livestock, plants. Lastly also the structural integrity of human con- structions including energy generation and recreational activities occurring in the tourism indus- try. (Nagavciuc et al., 2022, p. 14) • Alterations in climate conditions, which involve reduced precipitation, diminish the suitability and yield of crops specific to mountainous regions, such as potatoes and fruit trees. This man- dates the introduction of irrigation systems to mitigate droughts, leading to an increased fre- quency of natural disasters (World Bank & Ministerul Agriculturii și Dezvoltării Rurale, 2023, p. 123) • Romania stands as one of the European nations grappling with a significant incidence of land- slides. Approximately 42% of Romania’s landmass is exposed to conditions conducive to landslide occurrence. Instances of collapses and rockfalls are particularly prevalent in the Carpathian Mountains and sub-Carpathian regions, characterized by slopes comprising sturdy rocks riddled with numerous cracks and fissures. (Grozavu & Patriche, 2021, p. 1129) • The Carpathian countries have limited capacity to take measures to help forests and forestry adapt to climate change. None of them has yet directly addressed climate change in its forestry legislation (although the issue is usually included in national strategies). Adaptive capacity is substantially lower in the Romanian and Serbian part of the Carpathian region compared to the Western Carpathians. (Climate ADAPT, 2023) 2.1.2.2 Loss of biodiversity Due to their remoteness, mountainous areas act as a refuge for global plant and animal population. Mountains harbor around 50% of the most biodiverse regions of the world and play a key role in the maintenance of the global biodiversity (Payne et al., 2020, p. 530). Not all species are expected to be affected in the same way by changing climate conditions. Populations that are restricted to high- altitude peaks and plateaus must deal with a growing number of mid-slope species invading their territories. It is forecasted that already widespread species are going to further increase in number and inhabit even larger areas while smaller populations are more likely to go extinct (Wu-Bing, 2023). Situation in Romania In Romania’s Mountain Area, the balance between biodiversity conservation and resource use is being challenged by illegal logging, neglected pastures and increasing tourism, as well as by ambitious national 11 and EU environmental targets. Efforts to curb illegal logging and forest degradation have improved with initiatives such as the Timber Traceability System (SUMAL), but the phenomenon persists, while some agricultural practices and changes in livestock numbers pose a threat to the region’s rich biodiversity if appropriate measures are not implemented. Addressing these issues will require increased conservation efforts, more balanced resource management, and greater stakeholder engagement to protect these vital ecosystems. • Climate change poses significant threats to Romanian biodiversity. These threats include altera- tions in species behavior due to increased stress, changes in habitat distribution and composition, the rise of invasive exotic species, potential extinction of ecosystems associated with wet areas, modifications in freshwater and marine aquatic ecosystems, and the risk of extinction for certain flora and fauna species (Albertson et al., 2017, p. 26) Figure 1. Tree cover development – stock, loss between 2000-2022 and gains between 2000-20202 green: stock | pink: loss between 2000-2022 | purple: gains between 2000-2020 Source: (Global Forest Watch, 2023) • Half of the Carpathian forests is in Romania. The region provides an important refuge and corridor for the migration of diverse species and hosts exceptional biodiversity. (Albertson, Andresen and Cittadino, 2017, p. 24-25) However, there is an increasing risk of wildfires. As global temperatures rise, Romania’s climate is transitioning towards a more southern European pattern. Rising tem- peratures lead to evaporation and vegetation drying out, creating conditions for heatwaves and _ 2 Tree cover loss is not always deforestation. It includes human-caused and natural loss as well as of temporary and perma- nent endurance. 12 wildfires. Changes in the water cycle, including droughts, exacerbate this risk. Experts note that heatwaves, a major factor in wildfires, will become more intense and frequent due to climate change, amplifying the wildfire threat, also for Romanian biodiversity. (Popa, 2023) • Deforestation is a phenomenon that occurs intensively in Romania due to the important timber industry. With the aid of satellite images, it has been calculated that 317,000 hectares of Roma- nian forest were lost to logging between 2001 and 2017. Half of these trees were in national parks or conservation areas and were hundreds of years old. (See Figure 1; Global Forest Watch, 2023) The mountainous regions/massifs are particularly affected and, in case of further progress, con- sequences in the field of biodiversity loss, climate change or natural disasters are to be expected. (Kucsicsa & Dumitrică, 2019) • Climate change is likely to result in an upward shift of the tree line, impacting the species com- position within grassland ecosystems. Given that grasslands often support more vulnerable and less common species compared to shrubs and forests, this shift could result in a reduction in biodiversity (Albertson et al., 2017, p. 26) • The pollution of mountainous regions with excess nutrients has played a role in promoting eu- trophication, extending its effects downstream to the Black Sea. This extensive eutrophication is now negatively affecting biodiversity, marine ecosystems, and the recreational and economic worth of marine resources. (World Bank & Ministerul Agriculturii și Dezvoltării Rurale, 2023, p. 98) 2.1.2.3 Accessibility (road/rail/digital/electricity network) Mountainous regions are in most cases more sparsely populated than the national average, which makes the provision of modern infrastructure challenging and expensive. The challenges of good accessibility through public transport are especially prevalent under the aspects of an aging popula- tion that is often dependent on bus or rail connections and the fact that many of those connections present an economic loss for the provider. Areas with a strong tourism sector also have to deal with the challenge of a strongly varying demand for transport needs, depending on the season (Camarero and Oliva, 2019, p. 100). In those cases, the transport infrastructure is often more tailored to the needs of tourists than to local population (Euromontana, 2021a). Similar challenges occur with re- gards to the provision of electricity grids in mountainous areas. The low density and the seasonal fluctuation of electricity consumption prevents a cost-effective connection of all households (Forget & Ayroles, 2021). Remoteness, lack of certain services or market failures could be mitigated to an extend by expansion of modern digital infrastructure. However, currently 25% of rural EU-areas do not have broadband internet access (Euromontana, 2020, p. 4-5). Situation in Romania • In Romania, the Mountain Area’s challenges are less about road quality and more about limited public transport and rail access, which particularly affects the rural poor. Despite a well-devel- oped digital infrastructure, Internet access is hampered by quality, affordability and low digital literacy among the population. The sparsity of the population makes it difficult to provide modern infrastructure and public transport, and almost half of the mountainous regions are not connected to national roads. This isolation, combined with limited access to utilities and the risk of being overlooked for infrastructure improvements in favor of urban growth areas, severely impacts the socio-economic development and quality of life in these remote regions. In addition, the country's struggle with participation in lifelong learning and retention of ICT talent reflects broader edu- cation and workforce challenges. The only nationwide public eGovernment service is related to online tax payments. Digitization could provide benefits especially to citizens in mountainous, deltaic and rural areas, as well as generally lead to simplified administrative procedures, reduced bureaucracy and improved citizen-administration interactions. (ESPON, 2020, p. 29) 13 • In Romania, the mountainous areas and Danube Delta are identified as inner peripheries accord- ing to access to services of general interest. Access to utilities is difficult for inhabitants of these areas. For example, in Alba County there are still 495 households without electricity located in 28 settlements, some of them sparsely populated. (ESPON, 2020, p. 12) The socio-economic prob- lems of the Apuseni Mountains area are related to the high degree of dispersal in the territory of human settlements, which determines major deficiencies in the provision of technical and public infrastructure. (Ciolac et al., 2019, p. 10) • Despite ongoing efforts to bridge the rural infrastructure gap, many remote mountain regions still face accessibility issues, with nearly half of mountain Administrative Territorial Units (ATUs) lack- ing connections to national roads. The Southern and Nordic Groups of mountain regions are par- ticularly affected, with the highest concentration of ATUs lacking national road access. This ham- pers the quality of life and attractiveness of these areas, leading to lower population densities in remote mountain regions. (World Bank & Ministerul Agriculturii și Dezvoltării Rurale, 2023, p. 42) • As most of the mountain region in Romania is in distance to the growth poles such as Bucharest and other major cities, there is a risk that the improvement of connectivity will be pushed back concerning the prioritization of projects. (OECD, 2020, p. 20) 2.1.2.4 Reduced access to basic services Mountain areas often grapple with limited access to basic services due to a combination of geographical remoteness, challenging terrain, low population density, extreme weather conditions, economic con- straints, resource scarcity, environmental conservation efforts, seasonal tourism fluctuations, sparse healthcare facilities, and cultural isolation. These factors collectively contribute to the difficulties faced by mountain communities in maintaining and providing essential services. In some EU member states, more than half of the inhabitants of mountainous regions need to travel over an hour to the nearest hospital (European Parliament. Directorate General for Parliamentary Research Services., 2020, p. 6). There is also a lack of general practitioners to provide basic medical services to the local popu- lation. Mountain territory interest groups criticize the lack of governmental programs/incentives to attract general practitioners to Mountain Areas (Euromontana, 2020a, p. 4). Situation in Romania In Romania’s rural Mountain Area, residents face challenges in accessing basic social services like healthcare and education, alongside issues with utility connectivity and high energy costs. Despite a rel- atively higher number of schools, accessing education is difficult, and there is a notable struggle in at- tracting and retaining qualified staff in educational and healthcare sectors. This often necessitates travel to urban areas for essential services. While housing and utility access are on par with national trends, disparities between urban and rural areas are significant, and energy costs are exacerbated by colder climates and limited heating options. The region’s geographical remoteness, challenging terrain, and eco- nomic constraints add to these difficulties, highlighting the need for infrastructure improvements and targeted solutions to address these unique challenges. • The primary reasons these areas are categorized as inner peripheries are rooted in their distinc- tive mountainous terrain. In the case of the Carpathians, the challenge lies in the lack of access to regional centers and essential services, while the Apuseni Mountains face inner periphery clas- sification due to their economic limitations and high levels of poverty. (ESPON, 2020, p. 17) 14 Figure 2. Index of Spatial Accessibility concerning hospitals Source: (Dumitrache et al., 2020) • Local mountain stakeholders also expressed concerns about the inadequate infrastructure in mountain regions. These areas suffer from a lack of investment in essential utility connections, insufficient waste disposal services, pollution originating from neighboring regions that detrimen- tally affect the environment and local livelihoods, and a scarcity of communication technology and equipment for local law enforcement and emergency services. (World Bank & Ministerul Ag- riculturii și Dezvoltării Rurale, 2023, p. 17) • In the Apuseni Mountains, Romania, the population has easier access to hospital services (see Figure 2). However, there is an important lack of pharmacies in the region. In most of the area, there is only 1 pharmacy for more than 5,000 people, this is four times less pharmacies than in the rest of the country. (Euromontana, 2020a, p. 3) • Although the geographical distribution of education institutions in mountainous regions is ac- ceptable, a considerable proportion of compulsory schoolchildren drop out earlier. Thus, 25.4% of pupils from rural regions in Romania drop out of their compulsory schooling earlier (compared to 11% on average in the EU). (OECD 2020, p. 20) 2.1.2.5 Depopulation and aging population Mountain Areas do have on average a higher percentage of senior citizens living in them than non- mountainous regions. The percentage of people over 65 years of age in mountain areas is expected to increase from 21% in 2011 to around 30% in 2050 (European Commission. Joint Research Centre., 2021, p. 28). Even though the percentage of senior citizens is increasing, the overall population as well as the population of senior citizens in mountain areas is declining in most EU Member States (European Commission. Joint Research Centre., 2021, p. 29). The trend of over-ageing is fueled by the outwards migration of youths and especially women, which is even visible in areas with an overall 15 net-positive migration-balance (Euromontana, 2014, p. 9). The lack of young people affects the re- sources necessary for elderly care which in return could lead to forced migration of senior citizens to urban areas in order to receive proper care (World Bank & Ministerul Agriculturii și Dezvoltării Rurale, 2023, p. 11). Situation in Romania In Romania’s Mountain Area, demographic decline is largely driven by the outmigration of younger indi- viduals seeking better economic prospects, leading to an increasingly aged population. The percentage of seniors is projected to rise significantly by 2050, exacerbating the challenges in elderly care and poten- tially forcing seniors to relocate to urban areas for necessary services. This depopulation trend, particu- larly in labor-intensive sectors like agriculture, is leading to the abandonment of traditional activities. Forecasts suggest a significant reduction in both the young and working-age populations, while the elderly population shows varied trends across different regions. This ongoing demographic shift poses serious challenges to maintaining economic vitality, service provision, and sustainable development in the area. • One of the primary concerns among mountain communities is the depopulation of these areas, which is often viewed as an unavoidable trend. The aging population is partly attributed to youth migration out of mountain regions, where traditional activities like agriculture are seen as phys- ically demanding with low returns. This has led to the abandonment of agriculture and pastures, contributing to depopulation. (World Bank & Ministerul Agriculturii și Dezvoltării Rurale, 2023, pp. 120–121) • As already mentioned, the mountain regions in Romania are suffering not only from a decline in population but also from a thinning out of younger people. For the period between 2015 and 2050, a decline of at least 10% is predicted for the < 15s and the 15-65s. For the > 65s in the predominant area of the Romanian Carpathians, a stable development rate of between -10% and 10% is predicted for the same period. In some regions, especially in the western part of the mountainous area, there is also a shrinkage rate of more than 10% among the elderly. (European Commission. Joint Research Centre., 2021, p. 28) • Areas at risk of becoming sparsely populated areas are localized in central Dobrogea, large East- ern and Western Carpathian areas and disparately in Brăila County and at the southern border areas. These areas are often affected by poor accessibility and aging. Areas with low but stable population potential are found in the north-east counties and in the central Transylvania, partic- ularly in the mountainous areas. If demographic decline continues in these areas, they will rapidly reach thresholds below which service provision and economically and socially sustainable devel- opment become challenging. (ESPON, 2020, p. 15) 2.1.2.6 Decreasing role of agriculture Agriculture in mountainous areas, in Europe and globally, is declining due to several key factors. The rugged terrain limits available arable land and makes farming more challenging and costly. Economic viability is compromised as production costs rise and transportation becomes expensive. Climate change brings unpredictable weather and pests, posing further threats. Furthermore, Rural-to-urban migration reduces the agricultural workforce and vital knowledge. Additionally, government policies may favor lowland agriculture over mountain farming, exacerbating the decline. Due to the challeng- ing terrain in mountain areas the agricultural productivity is noticeable reduced, leading to many cases of land abandonment (European Commission. Joint Research Centre., 2021, p. 27). Another approach to offsetting a declining population involves shifting labor away from agriculture towards other sectors. 16 Situation in Romania In Romania’s Mountain Area, agriculture, forestry, and tourism are crucial for rural livelihoods, yet they face significant challenges due to a combination of structural problems and ineffective government poli- cies. In agriculture, many small-scale farms remain inefficient due to limited land and labor productivity, exacerbated by challenging terrain and climate change effects. Additionally, government policies often overlook the specific needs of mountain farming, leading to land abandonment and a shift in labor towards other sectors. In forestry, inefficiencies in the regulatory framework hinder investment, while tourism development is hampered by the lack of effective public-private partnerships and inadequate support for stakeholders. The lack of economic diversification, a legacy of the planned economy, further renders these communities vulnerable to market fluctuations. These issues collectively contribute to the under- performance of these key sectors and underline the need for improved policy interventions and support mechanisms. Addressing these sector-specific challenges is crucial for sustainable economic development and exploiting the full potential of agriculture, forestry, and tourism in the Mountain Area. • The factors contributing to employment reduction in agriculture are evident. During the period between 2017 and 2021, agricultural wages typically ranked 18 th out of 21 sectors. Additionally, roughly 28 percent of the poorest 40 percent of income earners in the Romanian economy were involved in subsistence agriculture (World Bank, 2018). • Romanian inner peripheries are generally located in rural territories characterized by unsuitable terrain for agriculture, particularly in the mountains. (ESPON, 2020, p. 17) • According to a case study in the Apuseni Mountains, Romania, it showed that the tourist potential is not yet fully capitalized. This is evident in the form of lack of local brands, tourist products, specialized training and of guidance to tourist areas. Lastly the potential is impaired because of a poor cooperation at local level (Ciolac, R. et al. 2019). • In summary, the mountainous agriculture of Romania faces a decline due to a combination of factors. These include lower economic returns compared to sectors like tourism and services, limited access to markets, and inadequate infrastructure and support services. These challenges collectively discourage investment in agriculture and contribute to its diminishing role in these areas. 2.1.2.7 Lack of employment opportunities The previously mentioned outwards migration of youth is strongly connected to lack of employment opportunities. Especially young adults with academic degrees are unable to find adequate employment if they return to their hometowns. Mountain areas often struggle to offer their well-educated youth fitting jobs, due to the lack of local economic diversification (Euromontana, 2022). A possible eman- cipation from agricultural work is tourism. However, even though tourism is linked to great economic potential it is insufficient to provide enough economic diversification and is often limited to a certain time of the year. Therefore, many jobs linked to tourism are seasonal and not suitable for a year- round stable income. Certain tourism practices also raise environmental concerns, and it is question- able if practices can be maintained over a longer period (Carbone, 2018, pp. 21-22). The described struggles of mountain areas lead to a significantly lower PPS (purchasing power standard) than their non-mountainous counterparts (Eurostat, 2021). Situation in Romania • The dwindling population and the outmigration of the young and educated segments of society exert a notable influence on the mountainous economy, particularly affecting the available labor force. In Romanian mountain counties, employment has experienced a steady decline, with an annual rate of approximately 1.6 percent since 2012. This decline comes at a time when the economy of mountain counties has been expanding at an annual rate of 2.8 percent over the period from 2012 to 2020. As a result, the decreasing employment, especially among the younger 17 and educated workforce, poses a significant obstacle to economic growth in these regions (World Bank & Ministerul Agriculturii și Dezvoltării Rurale, 2023, p. 28) • From 2008 to 2020, Romania experienced a decline of 700,000 agricultural workers. Some of them left the labor force, while others found employment in manufacturing, construction, and ser- vices, where job losses were less pronounced. This trend was observed in both mountainous and lowland regions (World Bank & Ministerul Agriculturii și Dezvoltării Rurale, 2023, p. 64) • The Apuseni Mountains include six counties and three development regions, the solution of the various problems regarding the development of the area embraces a large number of institutions, or the correlation of measures and actions that will be undertaken in each region will have to extend beyond the administrative boundaries of the regions. (Ciolac et al., 2019, p. 10) • Romania ranked in the top three productive countries within the context of mountain tourism. Although it has not had much impact on international tourism, this may be changing, as Romania has recently become a favored destination for more tourists due to its natural appeal. (Zeng et al., 2022, p. 19) There is an annual increase in the number of resorts and winter destinations, and with this increase, there comes a need for increasing the supply and quality of tourism in mountain areas for winter sports. (Bacoş and Gabor, 2021, p. 157) • The PPS per inhabitant in mountain regions in 2021 ranged from EUR 15,000 to EUR 24,300 in the mountainous regions whilst it has been 53,900 in the Bukarest region (Eurostat, 2021). 2.1.2.8 Social inclusion Women are an essential part to maintain daily life in mountain areas by strongly contributing to economic, ecological and social development. However, in governmental masterplans for mountain areas women’s issues are almost never specifically addressed, even though they are vital for rural life and belong to the groups with the highest tendencies to leave mountainous areas. Women face discrimination, own less (valuable) land on average and often do not possess the necessary means to react to emerging challenges. (FAO, 2018) Migrants moving into mountain regions can be categorized into three groups: all of them with their own needs, potentials and possible areas of conflict. (1) Migrants by choice are affluent people, often from an urban background. Their migration to mountain areas is often seasonal and for lifestyle-reasons. (2) Migrants by necessity move there for seasonal work (mostly linked with the tourism sector) or move to rural areas due to high rents in urban areas. (3) Migrants by force are refugees that flee from conflict (Perlik and Membretti, 2018, p. 251). Situation in Romania In Romania’s Mountain Area, living standards lag behind the rest of the country, with rural incomes nearly 3.5 times lower than urban ones, albeit the rural-urban disparity is slightly less pronounced here than in other regions. Poverty rates are lower and employment rates higher in these mountains compared to the lowlands, yet understanding these trends requires examining factors like migration and social exclusion. The rise of rural tourism offers economic opportunities but also risks cultural erosion and socioeconomic disparities. Addressing these interconnected issues is vital for enhancing living standards and sustainable development in the Mountain Area. • Under current conditions, rural tourism appears to be the main vector of change. This phenome- non emerged in the late 1990s, when some Bucharest-based tourists, who visited villages during the socialist era, decided to build their holiday homes there, benefiting from privatization and the deflation of land values. […] The penetratio n of urban lifestyles and tourism- related com- modification risks the annihilation of local traditions and cultures, together with the possibility 18 of land grabbing and increasing socioeconomic disparity. However, in a context lacking in endog- enous entrepreneurship, amenity migration and tourism may be able to ease the economic tran- sition from subsistence farming to multifunctional agriculture. (Gretter et al., 2017, p. 101) • Additionally, Romania stands out with the largest poverty disparities between its rural and urban areas among EU member states. To provide some perspective, in 2021, the at-risk-of-poverty or social exclusion rate was 12.2 percent in urban zones and considerably higher at 32.8 percent in rural areas within Romania. (See Figure 2; Eurostat Explained, 2022) • From a brief analysis of women’s participation in informal employment in the prevailing rural sector, agriculture (Figure 3), higher participation can be observed in several Member States (Romania by far the highest with 77.0%). (Kovačićek, 2019, p. 23-24) Figure 3. People at risk of poverty or social exclusion, in percentage (grouped in cities, towns plus suburbs and rural areas) in 2021 Source: (Eurostat Explained, 2022) 2.1.2.9 Imprecise governance and mismatch of policies Mountainous areas often require specific governance due to their challenging geography, ecological sensitivity, water resource significance, disaster vulnerability, unique agricultural practices, tourism dependence, transportation limitations, and cross-border considerations. Tailored governance ap- proaches are essential to address these distinctive characteristics and ensure sustainable develop- ment while preserving the environment and supporting mountain communities. Measures are often 19 taken, for example, to protect biodiversity and prevent disasters, but also to enable local people to live and work. In addition to private individuals, agricultural or other enterprises, public institutions or companies also depend to a large extent on legal certainty and the quality of governance. (Sala, 2021) Situation in Romania Romania’s Mountain Area faces governance challenges due to an outdated system that lacks a robust, multi-sectoral approach and sufficient stakeholder representation. The current focus on agriculture fails to meet the region’s diverse needs, with policies often shaped by central government mandates rather than local input, leading to resistance and non-compliance. The unique characteristics of mountainous areas, including ecological sensitivity and disaster vulnerability, require tailored governance. Issues in forest sector management and land registration reforms highlight the need for more inclusive and adap- tive governance. A shift towards a bottom-up, participatory approach is essential to address these chal- lenges, ensuring sustainable development and effective support for mountain communities in Romania. • The tensions and gaps in mountain resource governance in Romania stem from an outdated gov- ernance system that has not adapted to the significant changes over the past 30 years. This includes the shift to a market economy, which privatized forests and concessions in mountain areas. The governance model relies on rigid laws and regulations, often lacking input from local stakeholders, leading to misunderstandings and mistrust between regulators and the regulated. These issues have been evident in forest sector consultations and the designation of protected areas, highlighting the need for more inclusive and adaptive governance approaches. (World Bank & Ministerul Agriculturii și Dezvoltării Rurale, 2023, p. 105) • Although there is consensus on the need to adjust the way land registration and cadaster are reformed, the initiated reform is met with criticism due to its rigidity. Furthermore, the present delays are attributed to legislative issues, technical land surveying, and procedural problems (Păunescu et al., 2022, p. 2) • Prevailing funding programs are in accordance with national and European policies. Nonetheless, the programs could benefit from more consideration for the specific needs and conditions of Romania’s mountainous areas. A more bottom-up and participatory approach is asked for by cer- tain stakeholders. (Adascalitei, 2017, p. 16) 2.1.3 Prioritization of challenges The triangulation of sources has revealed a number of different challenges relevant to mountain regions. As outlined in section 1, Romanian mountain regions generally face similar challenges as mountain regions in other parts of Europe or the world. Nevertheless, some regional specificities could be identified that are particularly important to be addressed by the Strategy. These specifici- ties are based on the unique characteristics of Romanian mountain regions, which are not reflected in the same way by other regions in Europe. The research undertaken by the strategy development team has already conducted an extensive analysis of the most relevant challenges. Based on this research, a concise problem definition has been developed. It will form the basis for the development of a policy scenario, the definition of policy options and subsequently the design of actions to address the identified challenges. In order to refine the problem definition, the identified challenges forming the basis have been assessed against the broad literature review conducted in the context of the ex-ante analysis. To identify the most relevant challenges the project team has developed a systematic approach combining expert judgement and insights from the identified literature. In the initial step an exten- sive list as outlined above has been compiled outlining all potentially relevant challenges. In order to allow for the design of adequate policy responses to all challenges of high relevance, they have to be prioritized in the policy development process. 20 For the purpose of the ex-ante assessment, two core criteria form the foundation for prioritization: the potential severity of a challenge’s impact and the anticipated persistence or likelihood of its occurrence over time. These aspects are assessed in a three-tier ranking system (low, medium and high) for each identified challenge. Expert judgment, informed by the existing literature, guides the evaluation of each aspect. For assessing the severity in particular potential economic, environmental and social impact are taken into account based on the accessible information. For assessing the like- lihood of occurrence or persistence, in particular historical data, climate and geographic factors as well as socio-economic trends are considered. The prioritization however is not to be misunderstood as a ranking of more important issues which need support and less important issues which do not require action. In particular, no challenge iden- tified ranked “low” in terms of severity and persistence/likelihood. The exercise however led to the identification of several key areas and sub-aspects which do require particular attention: 1. Demographic Challenges and Economic Opportunities: The Mountain Area’s accelerating demographic decline, marked by the outmigration of its youth, underscores an urgent need to revitalize local economies. Prioritization should first aim at bolstering economic opportu- nities that can retain and attract the population. This includes enhancing access to quality education and healthcare, which are pivotal in improving living standards and reducing out- migration potentials. Special focus on remote areas is necessary to counter the aging popu- lation structure and support the sustenance of active economic life. 2. Living Standards and Utility Services: Given the lag in living standards and local human development indices, efforts must be channeled towards improving income levels through diversified economic activities and better-paying jobs. Prioritization should involve boosting connectivity and energy affordability, tackling the wide disparities between urban and rural amenities. Addressing the high energy costs and improving housing conditions in colder, high- altitude climates will contribute significantly to enhancing quality of life. 3. Infrastructure and Mobility: Road and infrastructure development, lagging partially behind other regions, still presents mobility challenges, particularly in terms of public transportation and the provided access to essential services. Therefore, efforts should be made to enhance transportation services and connectivity, enabling mobility in particular for the rural poor and facilitating economic activities. 4. Digital Inclusion and Skills Development: Despite a digital infrastructure in principle not lagging behind too far in comparison to other regions, the low digital skills of the population, coupled with affordability issues, call for targeted interventions. Priorities include not only expanding access to digital services and their affordability but also investing in digital literacy programs and lifelong learning opportunities, thus enabling the population and local busi- nesses to fully leverage digital advancements. 5. Agriculture, Forestry, and Tourism Enhancement: Agriculture, forestry, and tourism are key sectors with untapped potential. Addressing these with, investment support, and effec- tive regulatory frameworks can stimulate growth. Prioritizing public-private partnerships and enhancing support systems for stakeholders in these sectors will drive sustainable develop- ment and economic diversification. 6. Ecosystem Conservation and Climate Action: The region’s ecosystems are valuable national assets in climate and biodiversity targets but face numerous stressors. Prioritization here involves bolstering conservation efforts, curbing illegal logging, and managing pasture and water systems more effectively. Compensating landowners for biodiversity measures and en- gaging community stakeholders in resource management can align conservation with eco- nomic interests. 21 7. Climate Adaptation and Community Resilience: The growing climate vulnerability presents both a challenge and an opportunity. Prioritized actions should focus on developing a com- prehensive adaptation strategy, enhancing disaster risk reduction, and fostering climate-re- silient agricultural practices. Encouraging renewable energy and energy efficiency measures will serve dual purposes: bolstering environmental resilience and community self-reliance. 8. Institutional Empowerment and Stakeholder Involvement: Lastly, a strong institutional framework is essential for implementing robust, multi-sectoral policies. Strengthening the existing institutions, building awareness and increasing capacities for implementing re- sponses to Mountain Area challenges will facilitate better coordination among institutions and stakeholders, ensuring that policies reflect local needs and foster existing development potentials. As outlined the assessment correspondingly revealed no challenge to be of “low” persistence /likeli- hood and severity. The strategy for Romania’s Mountain Area should therefore adopt a holistic ap- proach, targeting interventions for sustained, inclusive growth and development, while preserving environmental heritage and fostering resilient communities across thematic areas. With a strategic horizon up to 2035, phased prioritization of interventions is crucial due to financial, technical, and human resource constraints. A key aspect of prioritization is thus also linked to the availability of financial resources for implementing actions, which due to the reliance on external funding sources can significantly affect the potential positive impacts to be achieved for the respective objectives. In the initial phase, high-priority interventions addressing urgent needs with immediate impact should be launched. These include among others in particular socio-economic measures supporting sustained economic diversification, improving of access to basic utilities, education and healthcare. Medium- priority interventions, to be introduced methodically, include improving internet infrastructure, ac- cessibility and investing in climate adaptation plans to increase resilience throughout sectors and territories. Lower-priority initiatives, important but not immediately critical, can be gradually im- plemented as resources allow. The prioritization of aspects furthermore needs to take into account the existing funding sources identified in the strategy, as well as the capacities of funding programs to adapt to the requirements. This will allow for recalibrating priorities and providing a realistic judgement on the implementation potentials and achievements. 2.2 Expected changes – theory of change and coherence Methodological approach of the ex-ante assessment: The ex-ante assessment reviewed the theory of change proposed by the Strategy, developed objectives and measures and assessed the internal coherence of the approach. The respective objectives and measures of the five pillars were reviewed and a critical reflection was provided on: • The structure of the objectives and their relation to each other • The potential of developed actions to contribute to the respective measures and objectives • Cross-effects and potential goal conflicts between the objectives and measures The structure was reviewed based on the project team’s experience in various ex-ante assessments and program and strategy development processes, considering the thematic breadth of issues, the depth and level of detail sought, and the implementation capacities of various programs. Finally, internal coherence and potential goal conflicts were reviewed based on the defined actions and ex- ample projects outlined for each objective. Contribution to the strategy development:. The ex-ante team provided detailed feedback on the structure of the objectives and actions in September 2023, and accompanied the restructuring and refinement process towards the final version with ad hoc inputs on ongoing developments. This 22 process allowed the ex-ante team to provide direct input to the development and discuss recom- mendations directly with the team. Uptake of the recommendation and remaining recommendation : The development of the overall framework and structure took into account the input from the ex-ante, but must be seen as a joint process, mainly driven by the strategy development. Ongoing discussions allowed for ad hoc inte- gration of ex-ante feedback and recommendations, which were ultimately reflected in the strategy development. 2.2.1 Theory of change and relevance The Strategy presents a theory of change as key element structuring the policy responses within the five pillars developed. The vision outlined defines: “By 2035, Romania’s Mountain Area will be a territory of growing opportunity where natural landscapes, public services, and private initiatives harmoniously complement each other to advance residents’ quality of life and foster a “living” Mountain Area“ for which the five pillars of the strategy are defined: • Pillar I: Thriving Multigenerational Communities (Attractive and Inclusive Mountain Communities) • Pillar II: Connected Mountain Living (Mobility and Digital Connectivity) • Pillar III: Green and Competitive Place-Based Economy • Pillar IV: Respect for Nature • Pillar V: Mountain Empowerment (Representative and Supportive Government) Following the theory of change, these five pillars are responding to the five main challenge areas identified for the Romanian Mountain Area: • Challenge Area 1: Demographic Decline and Low Living Standards • Challenge Area 2: Isolation and Connectivity: Limited Quality of Public and Private Services in Mountain Area Communities • Challenge Area 3: Lack of Economic Competitiveness and Innovation • Challenge Area 4: Pressure on Natural Resources and Environmental Management Systems • Challenge Area 5: Weak Governance and Low Institutional Capacities to Access Funding and Ser- vice Mountain Communities Accordingly, the theory of change is visualized in the following figure, which provides a clear link between the Pillars – Objectives – Measures and corresponding Outcomes. The following section as- sesses how the key issues are addressed and how the challenges are reflected in the strategy. The tables reviewed are presented in the “integrated perspective” for each challenge area, providing an overview of the key issues and root causes, allowing reflection on how the Strategy ’s objectives, actions and results address them, and highlighting potential gaps. It should be noted that the tables presented here are illustrative as they represent key parts of the integrated perspective for each challenge, but the assessment covers the entire problem definition including the textual parts in the Strategy. Key recommendations concern however the alignment of the extensive textual parts and the presentation of integrated perspective and tables in the strategy. 23 The subsequent tables represent the integrated perspective on each of the challenge areas. They outline the key problems and root causes. Challenge Area 1: Demographic Decline and Low Living Standards Key Problems Root Causes Potential consequences ▪ Demographic decline, dominated ▪ Limited lucrative economic op- ▪ Lack of recruitable/skilled work- by out-migration. portunities, over-reliance on low force ▪ Lower incomes in the Mountain productivity farming and other in- ▪ Loss of economic dynamism and Area formal activities. lack of entrepreneurial initiatives ▪ Lack of skills to start own initia- ▪ Decreased attractivity of the tives. Mountain Area ▪ Low numbers of skilled profes- ▪ Land abandonment and ecological sionals in sectors such as educa- deterioration tion and healthcare. ▪ Health risks and school abandon- ▪ Low-density areas. ment ▪ Urban-centric development. ▪ Social isolation and fragility ▪ Loss of traditions, cultural herit- age and food diversity. ▪ Pollution. The key problems outlined will be addressed through the overall strategy, however, the Strategy’s aspiration in relation to demographic stabilization, is not so focused on population numbers, but rather on tackling the economic need for outmigration so that people no longer feel forced to move away, and the socioeconomic environment enables them to remain in nearly any part of the Mountain Area if they so wish. Therefore, the demographic decline, which is linked to limited employment opportunities and eco- nomic diversification, limited innovation potential and low accessibility and service provision, is ad- dressed in particular by Pillars I and III. Pillar I provides measures for several of the outlined causes particularly linked to service provision. The key problem of lower incomes, linked is reflected in particular in Pillar III. The challenge area is thus clearly reflected in the strategy and the link between objectives and results is established. 24 Recommendation: Reflect in the summary table, under the outlined key problems the aspects on “lower living standards in mountain areas ”, which is properly discussed in the text, but narrowly presented in the table, focusing on an income-centered key problem and root causes. This would also improve coherence within the strategy in relation to the respective Pillar I objectives. It would fur- thermore better reflect the intended outcomes of Pillar I interventions. Challenge Area 2: Isolation and Connectivity: Limited Quality of Public and Private Services in Mountain Area Communities Key problems Root causes Potential consequences ▪ The Mountain Area poorer access ▪ Difficulties in attracting educated ▪ Unattractive living conditions to education and medical ser- professionals to Mountain Areas, ▪ Limited professional/economic vices. due to low living standards. opportunities and earning poten- ▪ Access to public utilities, while ▪ Low “returns” on investment in tial. not worse than in lowlands, is still public infrastructure and services ▪ Social isolation and suboptimal far worse than the average in EU due to low and declining popula- health Member States. tion density ▪ Limited interest for businesses to ▪ Isolation and limited mobility of ▪ Lack of vision for alternative mo- invest in the Mountain Area residents in sparsely populated bility solutions (with low hard-in- parts of the Mountain Area due to frastructure requirements) limited transportation density ▪ Geographic and terrain challenges (road, rail, cable, air) and ser- ▪ Low digital skills of businesses vices (public transportation, and population. rideshare) ▪ Unaffordability of Internet for ▪ Limited economic access to digi- some groups tal services The key problems outlined are addressed mainly through Pillars I and II of the Strategy, with limited links to Pillars III to V. Key issues related to health services, education and access to public services are addressed mainly through Objectives 1 and 2, while issues related to mobility and digital connec- tivity are addressed through Objectives 5 and 6. Not all of the actions proposed in the Strategy are clearly rooted in an identified need, particularly in relation to education (e.g. the need for kinder- garden/daycare is not prominent in the challenges, yet in the actions proposed. On the other hand, main gaps in relation to higher education are identified but not addressed). Recommendation: Improve the presentation of the table summarizing the challenge area 2, to reflect discussions presented in the section. Specifically, eflect physical access to the Internet in the key issues to improve coherence with actions under Objective 6, and include limited access to health care in the root causes, beyond the low return on investment aspect, to highlight the potential high de- mand and the need for the strategy to emphasize this aspect. In addition, review the alignment between challenges and measures/actions on education to improve the coherence based on the outline above. Challenge Area 3: Lack of Economic Competitiveness and Innovation Key problems Root causes Potential consequences ▪ Attrition of the workforce in the ▪ Outmigration, particularly of the ▪ Limited investment in the agri- Mountain Area young and educated, due to lower food and forestry bioeconomy ▪ Large share of land and labor in living standards. ▪ Lack of attractive jobs and pro- inefficient micro-farms ▪ Romania has underinvested in fessional opportunities ▪ Poor access of small farms to so- public good instruments for small ▪ Lack of business innovation and cial support, advisory and market- and medium-sized farm support, entrepreneurship ing services including cadaster, advisory ser- ▪ Land abandonment ▪ High level of rural poverty vices and marketing assistance for small farms. ▪ Environmental degradation 25 Key problems Root causes Potential consequences ▪ Limited investment, outdated ▪ Expensive and difficult to reallo- technology, and low level of cate land and labor from micro- added value in the agriculture, farms to viable agricultural pro- forestry and wood sector ducers. ▪ Continued existence and vulnera- ▪ Lack of an agreed-upon forestry bility of single-industry towns and regulatory regime that balances weakly diversified ATUs the interests of conservation and ▪ Insufficiently supported tourism forest landownership. sector ▪ Market access and other infra- ▪ Low added value of the forest bi- structure deficiencies oeconomy retained in the Moun- ▪ Low levels of collective action tain Area ▪ Bureaucratic requirements and complex regulatory environment The key problems outlined are addressed mainly through Pillar III of the strategy, and also partially also through Pillars I and II. The issues related to key sectors are clearly outlined and the respective root causes identified for Agriculture and forestry. For tourism and more broadly SME and innovation, root causes are not fully apparent from the integrated presentation. Overall the challenges identified are addressed by the Strategy. Recommendation: In order to clearly delineate between the challenge areas, issues mainly related to other challenge areas (e.g. out-migration) should be reflected there and only a cross-link be inserted. Otherwise, underlying general issues which have spin-off effects are reflected repeatedly for each challenge area. Furthermore it is recommended to remove “reallocation of land” from the root causes as this mainly represents a potential measure and not a root cause of the issues. Challenge Area 4: Pressure on Natural Resources and Environmental Management Systems Key problems Root causes Potential consequences ▪ Unsustainable forest harvesting ▪ Weak consultation and communication ▪ Loss of biodiversity and practices, illegal logging with stakeholders on policy process re- other ecosystem services ▪ Low forest and timber productiv- lated to natural resource management (including cultural ones) ity & value addition ▪ Complex institutional and administrative ▪ Undermining of the Moun- ▪ Technologically outdated equip- framework and lack of reliable mecha- tain Area’s core assets and ment in forest nism for control and market transparency bioeconomy (agriculture, ▪ Low energy efficiency of biomass (particularly in the forest sector) forestry, tourism, new heating installations ▪ Tensions and complexities of protected sectors) ▪ Decreasing extent and health of area management and policy implemen- ▪ Environmental degrada- managed grasslands tation tion ▪ Water pollution and eutrophica- ▪ Lack of proper legal frameworks to in- ▪ Unfulfilled potential to tion linked to agricultural runoff centivize investments in environmental store carbon, reduce emis- and residential wastewater technologies, low energy efficiency. sions, and mitigate cli- ▪ Loss of interest in traditional agrarian mate change ▪ Soil contamination due to histori- cal mining activities activities (such as shepherding) ▪ Diminished resilience of ▪ Intensification of agriculture ecosystems and Mountain ▪ Ecosystem damage linked to un- communities stainable tourism & other eco- ▪ Inadequate sewage/water infrastructure nomic activities ▪ Tensions between competing goals (con- ▪ Increasing climate risk leading to servation and economic opportuni- aridity, landslides, extreme ties) and poor implementation of com- weather. pensation frameworks. ▪ Climate change ▪ Depopulation (reducing opportunities for grassland management) 26 The key problems outlined are addressed mainly through Pillar IV of the Strategy, with slight positive contributions from other pillars. The strategic objective is clearly aligned with the problem defini- tion, but not all objectives show an equally strong link to the key problems. In particular, the role of land use and forestry in climate change mitigation (objective 12) and the management of protected areas are not clearly linked to the key issues outlined. Nevertheless, all key issues are addressed and there are no gaps in the framework. Recommendation: The key problems summarized in the challenge table do not reflect the problems associated with land use changes (deforestation) and associated threats of biodiversity loss and cli- mate change, which are well discussed in the text. The description of the challenges could benefit from strengthening the relevance of protecting forest in relation to biodiversity conservation and climate change mitigation. Challenge Area 5: Weak Governance and Low Institutional Capacities to Access Funding and Ser- vice Mountain Communities Key problems Root causes Potential consequences ▪ Lack of an integrated territorial ▪ Centralized agenda setting with ▪ Weak implementation of existing development strategy poor participation (especially in policies ▪ Narrow focus of Mountain-specific implementation) ▪ Lack of ownership of local author- policies and programs ▪ Weak culture of collective action ities and stakeholders on develop- ▪ Suboptimal policies, poorly tai- ▪ Political and technical weakness ment efforts lored and communicated to the of subnational and MA agencies, ▪ Inadequate addressing of Moun- MA including bureaucratic excesses tain-specific needs and opportuni- ▪ Tensions between regulated and ▪ Lack of coordination and overlap- ties regulators/authorities ping or unclear roles of different ▪ Persistence of territorial gaps and ▪ Lack of implementation capacity government agencies potential widening of those gaps and motivation ▪ Lack of data systems and tools for across all the challenge areas de- ▪ Lack of funding making evidence-driven policy scribed ▪ Lack of local capacity to capture ▪ Incapacity to address future risks and mobilize relevant funding (e.g. climatic, environmental, ▪ Institutional shifts and lack of food security) policy continuity The key problems identified are mainly addressed under Pillar V, but several other governance and policy related actions are defined in particular under Objectives 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13. Issues related to policy making are clearly outlined in the problem definition and addressed by the Strategy, in particular through Objective 14. Issues addressed by Objective 15 are partially outlined in the prob- lem definition, mainly in relation to gaps in administrative capacity and funding. Other actions de- fined under Objective 15 do not have a clear corresponding key issue. Recommendation: outline key issues related to problems with local public administration and lack of digital skills and available e-government services. 2.2.2 Internal coherence of the strategy The internal coherence of the strategy was assessed on the basis of the objectives, measures and actions outlined. The actions and initiatives outlined are examples that indicate a direction of devel- opment and clarify the intent of the measures. However, they are not considered to be the final implementation proposals of the strategy. At the objective level, the ex-ante team assessed the 27 potential conflicts and contributions between objectives. The assessment followed the OECD defini- tion of coherence (“The extent to which other interventions (particularly policies) support or un- dermine the intervention and vice versa.”3) and was made in four distinct categories: • 0: No positive or negative cross-effect • 1: potential positive relation • 2: clear positive relation • 3: potential negative relation The assessment is presented in detail in annex X and revealed in principle clear internal coherence of the strategy where the majority of objectives have either a positive or no influence on other objectives. Only between Pillar III and Pillar IV some potential negative influence could be identified based on the example actions provided. Pillar I shows strong internal coherence within the measures of Pillar I itself as well as with Pillar II. In particular measures related to the improved accessibility (Obj. 5) and improved internet access (Obj. 6) have the potential for positive influence on Mountain residents access to various services both virtually as well as in situ. The majority of measure relations of these pillars thus show clear positive relation. Furthermore, strong coherence is observed in particular between Measure 4 and all measures of Pillar III related to the economic development of the Mountain Area. While no adverse effects are particularly expected, overall coherence of Pillar I with Pillar IV of the strategy is not strong. Infrastructure development in relation to Objective 1 and 2 can, depending on the implementation, in principle have adverse effects on the environmental objectives of Pillar IV, however this is strongly related to the concrete projects implemented and does not create a conflict on objective level. Pillar II shows particularly strong coherence with Pillars I and III. For Pillar I, internet access and connection quality constitute a precondition for various services proposed in relation to e-health or education. In addition, a strong positive link with Objective 15 on government services is created in relation to e-government. For Pillar III, likewise internet accessibility is a precondition for innova- tiveness and contributes to implementation of smart specialization strategies. In addition, touristic services depend more and more on high quality internet connection, and tourist demand for such services increases. The strongest connection is thus established in relation to Objectives 9 and 10. Physical connectivity on the other hand is of high importance for all objectives under Pillar III. The emphasis by the actions proposed is laid on sustainable public transport, thus positive effects are created as a spin-off from general accessibility for population and workforce. These actions are again of highest importance for tourism and SME/entrepreneurship thus showing a strong link to objectives 9 and 10. No general adverse effects are expected as creation of physical infrastructure with the potential to create conflicts with Pillar IV is not a key action proposed. Further synergies with Pillars IV and V are however also not very distinct, and internal synergies within Pillar II are limited. Pillar III shows very strong coherence within the objective itself, focusing on the development of complementary sectors and strengthening local, cross-sectoral value chains. Potential synergetic re- lations are visible for all objectives defined. Furthermore, the strongest potential contribution of all activities can be identified in relation to Objective 4 under Pillar I. For relations to Pillar II, the objectives under Pillar III mainly benefit from the improved accessibility and can in turn lead to a higher rentability of the investments thus increasing the likelihood of them being financed out of funding programs. _ 3 4. Understanding the six criteria: Definitions, elements for analysis and key challenges | Applying Evaluation Criteria Thoughtfully | OECD iLibrary (oecd-ilibrary.org) 28 Adverse effects on the other hand are possible in relation to Pillar IV in particular, depending on the implementation of actions. Mountain tourism has the potential for challenging already stressed eco- systems in particular as nature-based tourism is a key element of the strategy. Likewise, forestry and agricultural measures can lead to both positive and negative consequences, e.g. in relation to soil and water quality. Increased erosion or pollution through higher intensity agriculture or forestry sec- tors can particularly influence objective 12. Nevertheless, the indicative examples for actions as well as some of the measures (e.g. measure 7.6) underline a positive relation to objective 12 in particular. The concrete implementation thus is crucial for ensuring no goal conflicts arise from the deployment of the strategy. Pillar IV shows particularly strong internal coherence within pillar IV due to the nature of the selected measures and outlined example actions which are mutually beneficial and interconnected. Further- more, the governance-focused measures and example actions present in all objectives show the po- tential to positively influence the related objectives in Pillar V. Some positive synergies towards economic objectives are seen as well, in particular related to mountain tourism. Adverse effects through implementation are not directly implied by the measures and potential ac- tions. Nevertheless, protection regimes established and strengthened could to an extent hamper specific developments related to forestry (mainly) and agriculture (to a limited extent) in Pillar III. As the measures defined do not imply going beyond the legal requirements already defined, these potential adverse effects are not likely to materialize. Pillar V finally is identified as support for the overall development and implementation of the strat- egy, however, it does not place particular focus or emphasis on specific aspects. It is thus likely that synergies will materialize in relation to the governance-oriented elements of Pillars I through IV. Measures related to the development of internet access (objective 6) show a strong link to e-govern- ment services. Adverse effects on other objectives in relation to Pillar V are not expected. Recommendations No critical goal conflicts have been identified in the internal coherence review. In relation to Pillar III and IV, some conflicts are possible depending on the concrete implementation of the Strategy, mainly in relation to economic development and potential negative impacts on natural capital. The expected adverse effects are however limited due to the focus of measures and outlined actions. In particular in relation to mountain tourism, carrying capacity as a concept should be presented in relation to the development of actions, in particular for measure 9.5. Furthermore, any measures and actions related to nature-based tourism should emphasize the sustainable use of natural capital to avoid exploitation and negative long-term effects, even in the absence of visitor management plans. Pillar V currently is developed in a broad manner and has the potential for cross-cutting synergies. Where possible, clearer indication on responsibilities in relation to specific objectives could be given to strengthen the coherence with other Pillars. For potential goal conflicts between Pillars II and IV depending on the concrete implementation, no further recommendations on strategy level are provided. These goal conflicts cannot be addressed on strategy level but require project-based assessments and potentially countermeasures. 29 Table 1: Internal coherence Problem Definition Pillar I Pillar II Pillar III Pillar IV Pillar V -1 Improve -2 Improve -3 Revitalize -4 Economi- -5 Enable -6 Enable -7 Enable -8 -9 Increase -10 Support SMEs, -11 Assure -12 soil and -13 Enhance -14 Increase -15 Foster Mountain building qual- civic and cul- cally support Mountain more Moun- profitable Strengthen- the eco- entrepreneurship, the integ- water qual- the social- the repre- more sup- residents’ ity and access tural life in and protect residents’ tain Area and compet- ing eco- nomic and the develop- rity and ity and miti- ecological re- sentation of portive ser- access to to basic utili- Mountain “at-risk” rural mobility residents to itive Moun- nomic op- weight ment of smart health of gate cli- silience of Mountain vice on the quality ties in Moun- towns and Mountain within and benefit from tain agrifood portunities Mountain specialization in- Mountain mate the Mountain stakeholders part of healthcare, tain towns and Mountain ru- communities beyond the internet ac- value chains in the tourism dustries across protected change Area in the in relevant public-fac- education, rural Mountain ral areas Mountain cess Mountain sectors forests, (mitigate face of cli- policymak- ing 30gov- and other areas Area forest bioe- grasslands, and prevent mate and ing ernment social ser- conomy and other environ- other risks entities op- vices in (and the ecosystems, mental and erating in towns and non-food and strictly climate pol- the Moun- rural areas bioecon- protected lution) tain Area omy at old-growth large) and primary forests Objective Measures Reflection Reflection Reflection Reflection Reflection Reflection Reflection Reflection Reflection Reflection Reflection Reflection Reflection Reflection Reflection Pillar I -1 Improve Mountain residents’ access to quality 2 1 0 2 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 healthcare, education, and other social services in towns and rural areas -2 Improve building quality and access to basic utilities 2 2 1 2 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 in Mountain towns and rural Mountain areas -3 Revitalize civic and cultural life in Mountain towns 1 2 0 2 1 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 and Mountain rural areas -4 Economically support and protect “at-risk” rural 0 1 0 1 1 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 1 1 Mountain communities Pillar II -5 Enable Mountain residents’ mobility within and be- 2 2 2 1 0 1 1 2 2 0 0 1 0 0 yond the Mountain Area -6 Enable more Mountain Area residents to benefit 2 1 1 1 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 2 from internet access Pillar III -7 Enable profitable and competitive Mountain agrifood 0 0 1 2 1 0 2 2 2 3 1 1 0 1 value chains -8 Strengthening economic opportunities in the Moun- 0 0 1 2 1 0 2 1 2 3 1 1 0 0 tain forest bioeconomy (and the non-food bioeconomy at large) -9 Increase the economic weight Mountain tourism 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 3 2 1 0 -10 Support SMEs, entrepreneurship, and the develop- 1 1 0 2 2 2 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 ment of smart specialization industries across sectors Pillar IV -11 Assure the integrity and health of Mountain pro- 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 1 0 2 2 1 1 tected forests, grasslands, and other ecosystems, and strictly protected old-growth and primary forests -12 soil and water quality and mitigate climate change 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 3 0 2 2 1 1 (mitigate and prevent environmental and climate pol- lution) -13 Enhance the social-ecological resilience of the 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 2 Mountain Area in the face of climate and other risks Pillar V -14 Increase the representation of Mountain stakehold- 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 ers in relevant policymaking -15 Foster more supportive service on the part of pub- 2 1 0 1 0 2 1 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 lic-facing government entities operating in the Moun- tain Area Overall Judgement: 30 2.2.3 External coherence In addition to the internal coherence assessment, the ex-ante team reviewed the overarching stra- tegic policy framework in order to identify potential conflicts or synergies requiring specific atten- tion. However, the strategic nature of the document, which cannot implement actions and projects on its own but acts rather as a guidance and coordination strongly limits the amount of potential conflicts. Furthermore, the strategy considers a wide range of relevant policies and policy framework in the development and shows strong alignment with the respective objectives. The considered pol- icies and policy frameworks include: • The United Nations (UN) 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and Romania’s Sustainable Development Strategy 2030 (GD No. 877/2018) • The European Commission Political Guidelines 2019-2024 including o EU Climate Adaptation Strategy and Romania National Strategy on Adaptation to Climate Change 2023-2030 o The EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 and National Strategy and Action Plan for Biodiver- sity Conservation 2014–2020 o The EU Forest Strategy for 2030 and Romania National Forest Strategy 2030 (FS30) (GD No. 1227/2022) o The EU Circular Economy Action Plan and Romania’s Circular Economy Strategy 2022 (GD No. 1.172/2022) and Action Plan (Decision no. 927/2023) o The EU Farm to Fork Strategy (F2F • EU Common Agricultural Policy 2023-2027 and the Romanian National Cap Strategic Plan • EU Rural Vision 2040 and the EU Rural PACT • EU Cohesion Policy 2021-2027 • EU Urban Agenda and Romania’s Urban Policy 2022-2035 (National Integrated Urban Develop- ment Strategy for Resilient, Green, Inclusive and Competitive Cities- GD 1575/2022) • EU Digital Agenda 2020-2030 • National strategies: o National Housing Strategy 2022-2050 GD No 842/2022) o National Strategy on Social Inclusion and Poverty Reduction 2022-2027 GD No 440/2022) o National Strategy regarding the Rights of Persons with Disabilities “A fair Romania” 2022- 2027 GD No 490/2022) o Strategy of the Romanian Government for the Inclusion of Romanian Citizens belonging to the Roma Minority 2012-2027 (GD No 560/2022) o National Strategy for the Social Inclusion of Homeless People 2022-2027 (GD No 1491/2022) o National Strategy for Preventing and Combating Sexual Violence “SINERGIE” 2021-2030 (GD No 592/2021) o National Strategy for Employment 2021-2027 (GD No 558/2021) o National Health Strategy for Romania 2023-2030 (GD No 1004/2023) o Strategy for the Development of Human Resources in Health 2022-2030 (GD No 854/2022) o National Strategy for Research, Innovation and Smart Specialization 2022-2027 (GD No 933/2022) o National Railway Infrastructure Development Strategy 2021-2025 (GD No 985/2020) 31 o National Strategy concerning Intelligent Transportation Systems 2022-2030 (GD No 867/2022) o National Policy Framework for Market Development Regarding Alternative Fuels in the Transport Sector and for the Installation of Relevant Infrastructure in Romania (GD No 34/2017) o National Road Safety Strategy 2022-2030 (GD No 682/2022) o National Strategy on Education for the Environment and Climate Change 2023-2030 (GD No 59/2023) o Flood Risk Management Strategy 2010-2035 (GD No 846/2010) o Disaster Risk Reduction Framework and the Fire Protection System (draft prepared not yet approved) • Sectoral policies: o Romania’s National Strategy for the Development of Tourism 2023-2035 (under consulta- tion) o Strategy for the Development of Spa Tourism (GD No 571/2019) o Romania’s National Strategy for the Development of Ecotourism 2019 -2029 (GD No 358/2019) • Territorial and mountain specific strategies o Romania’s Territorial Development Strategy 2035 o The Sustainable Development Strategy of Tourism in the Carpathian Mountains o Romania’s Strategic Guidelines for the Sustainable Development of Less Favored Mountain Areas (approved as an annex to the PNDR 2014-2020) o Romania’s Mountain Law 2018 (Law 197/201 8) Figure 4. Policy layers Source: ÖIR 2023 The policy framework in the context of the ex-ante assessment was analyzed taking into considera- tion these different layers of policies on international/EU level, national and regional level, as well as the cross-cutting sectoral- and territorial strategies. The comprehensive inclusion of strategies and policies in the review supports high-level alignment with the Strategy. The broad nature of many 32 of the policies considered, and the correspondingly broad nature of the Strategy, leads to potential synergies and potential conflicts across the objectives of the Strategy. Nevertheless, overall align- ment with the strategic policy framework is ensured. Several objectives of the Strategy strongly support other policies, e.g. in relation to the EU Vision for Rural Areas and the Common Agricultural Policy, the Cohesion Policy, the Digital Agenda, the National Tourism Strategy and many others. Potential conflicts in implementation may arise in particular in relation to nature conservation and sustainable development, if sustainability principles are not taken into account, e.g. in relation to tourism development or agricultural and forestry development. How- ever, the Strategy places a clear emphasis on supporting only those activities that do not have sig- nificant negative impacts on the environment and sustainability, so no general coherence problem could be identified at the strategy level. However, out of the large range of policies considered, several groups with higher potential for issues related to coherence could be identified. Policy ex- amples where coherence issues may arise nevertheless have to be monitored to ensure positive in- teractions between the strategies and policies on hand. The aims of the UN SDG potentially lead to minor conflicts in coherence considering that certain measures aimed at economic prosperity, in particular in relation to tourism, may inflict disadvanta- geous effects on the environment (goal 15). In particular, the development of economic or social matters has to be balanced with the preservation of essential natural functions. The health of the mountain protected forests and grasslands may be influenced by certain SDGs on the other hand. Due to the mostly clear focus of the strategy on sustainable measures outlined in the corresponding ac- tions, no critical issue related to coherence could be identified, thus no further action in relation to high-level alignment is recommended. The monitoring alignment of Mountain Strategy and SDGs sug- gest, that any cross-relation will be mostly mutually beneficial. The policy sphere of the EU Political Guidelines 2019-2024 may also offer small risks in terms of coherence. Especially Pillar III with its spotlight on economic growth may be hampered by environ- mental preservation obligations such as outlined by the Biodiversity Strategy on Eu- and national level. A thorough consideration between interests has to be made to avoid disadvantageous effects through the focus on agriculture, industry and tourism sector in the mountain regions. Moreover, the Common Agricultural Policy and its measures may create minor negative coherence effects if the multi-faceted interactions between the policies are not taken into account. By example, economic diversification, especially tourism, may be delayed by the ongoing dominance of agriculture in the region, even though several policy measures to support this diversification exist. Furthermore even considering the improved environmental performance of the CAP, nature conservation issues still arise. The balance of a viable and competitive agriculture on the one hand and a preserved and unimpeded natural environment (including as one of the basic factors for tourism on the other hand) is challenging to achieve. Sectoral coordination for these aspects is of key importance, in order to foster the maximum possible mutually beneficial development paths. While no critical conflict in relation to coherence can be identified, reflection and consideration, in particular in the framework of the National Mountain Council (being comprised of – amongst others – the relevant ministries for these partially conflicting aspects as well as representatives of the civil society and further relevant stakeholders) is key to avoid conflicts in implementation. Ultimately, the implementation of actions in relation to the strategy rely on further programs and external funding. The specific design of these actions, programs and funding schemes is determining the coherence with specific strategies and policies to a greater extent than the definition of indica- tive actions in the Mountain Strategy can. Involvement and strengthening the role of broad coordina- tion and advisory bodies such as the NMC who can keep track of the wide range of activities imple- mented under the numerous objectives will considerably improve a coherent development between the Mountain Strategy and further policies. 33 3 Socioeconomic impact 3.1 Methodological approach of the assessment of socioeconomic impacts 3.1.1 Territorial impact assessment supplemented by literature-based analysis Due to the high relevance of territorially differentiated effects, the key methodological approach applied for the assessment of socioeconomic impacts has been the Territorial Impact Assessment (TIA). This approach was used to assess the following impacts: • Social impact (including Impact on fundamental human rights and freedoms) • The macroeconomic impact (including the impact on the business environment) • The impact on the environment • Governance impacts The concept of territorial impact assessment (TIA) aims to show the regional differentiation of the impact of legislation, strategies and broader policies. The TIA Quick Check is a hybrid methodology adaptable to any policy and supported by a calculation and mapping tool that can be used to support policymakers and practitioners in identifying potential ex-ante territorial impacts of new legislation and policies. It is originally developed for the European level and has been applied in multiple settings and on a broad range of topics by the European Commission as well as the Committee of the Regions. For Romania, a specific approach and tool has been set up to work on the ATU/LAU level. The “TIA Quick Check” approach combines a workshop setting for identifying systemic relations between a policy and its territorial consequences with a set of indicators describing the sensitivity of Romanian regions. This approach helps to steer an expert discussion about the potential territorial effects of a policy proposal by checking all relevant indicators in a TIA workshop. The results of the guided expert dis- cussion are judgements about the potential territorial impact of a policy, in different thematic fields (the economy, society, the environment, governance) for a range of indicators. The tool translates the combination of the expert judgements on exposure with the different sensi- tivity of regions into maps showing the potential territorial impact of a policy at the ATU/LAU level. These maps serve as a starting point for further discussion of different impacts of a specific policy on different regions. Consequently, the experts participating in the workshop provide important input to this quick check on the potential territorial effects of a policy proposal. The TIA quick check approach is based on the following steps: • Identifying the potential territorial effects of the Mountain Strategy on the economic, societal, environmental and governance related development of the mountain region by a group of experts in a TIA-workshop through drawing a systemic picture showing of these effects • Selecting indicators describing the identified potential territorial effects of the Mountain Strategy on economy, society, environment and governance • Judging the intensity of the potential effects by the workshop participants • Calculating and mapping the potential territorial impact according to the selected indicators by combining the expert judgement with the regional sensitivity The TIA approach allows to identify relevant impacts of the Mountain Strategy. However, as not all effects can be pinned down to quantitative numbers and as for not all effects indicators are available to describe them on ATU/LAU level, further impacts were identified based on literature review and expert analysis. 34 3.1.2 Territorial impact assessment workshop The TIA-workshop on the Mountain Strategy was held on 21st and 22nd of September 2023 and brought together a number of experts representing different organizations and LRAs. In the first step, the participating experts discussed the potential effects of the Mountain Strat- egy, using a territorial or place-based approach. This discussion revealed potential territorial im- pacts in all discussed thematic fields, thus economic, societal, environmental and governance-related impacts aspects. The participants identified potential linkages between implementation of the se- lected measures and the effect on territories, including interdependencies and feedback loops be- tween different effects (see Figure 5). In order to account for the complexity and thematic broadness of the strategy, the drafting of a systemic picture was conducted in two stages. In the first stage, each Pillar of the strategy was discussed separately in parallel poster-sessions, with participants allocated to Pillars based on their expertise and background. (Pillars 2 and 5 were grouped in one discussion.) Consequently, four indi- vidual systemic pictures were created by the participants on potential impact, which subsequently were consolidated into one picture, showing potential territorial impacts of the Mountain Strategy. The consolidation was implemented through a plenary discussion, thus safeguarding the review and amendment of any individual assessments made for the individual Pillars. The discussion revealed strong interrelations between the Pillars and multiple interdependencies leading to effects on the ground only if specific preconditions are met. Figure 5. Workshop findings: Systemic picture Source: Territorial impact assessment expert workshop, 21-22 September 2023 35 In order to assess the potential effects pictured in the systemic picture, suitable indicators were to be selected for the impacts that the experts discussed in the fields of the economy, the envi- ronment, society and governance. The availability of data for all ATU/LAU regions posed certain limitations on the indicators that can be used, however the comprehensive data collection in the Territorial Observatory in Romania allowed for the identification of suitable indicators for most of the fields discussed. (In those cases, where no relevant indicator could be identified, an additional expert judgement on the impacts is provided.) For the selected indicators the workshop participants estimated the potential effects of the Moun- tain Strategy. They judged the potential effect on the territorial welfare along the following scores: • ++ strong advantageous effect on territorial welfare (strong increase) • + weak advantageous effect on territorial welfare (increase) • o no effect/unknown effect/effect cannot be specified • - weak disadvantageous effect on territorial welfare (decrease) • -- strong disadvantageous effect on territorial welfare (strong decrease) Based on the expert judgement and the underlying territorial sensitivity provided through the se- lected indicators, the “territorial impact” value for each LAU was calculated by combining the quan- titative indicator-data describing the regional sensitivity with the expert judgment gathered through workshops on the strength of the potential effects. The applied approach is based on the vulnerability concept developed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). It combines the expert judgement determining the “exposure” caused by the objectives of the Mountain Strategy with the quantitative indicators describing the “territorial sensitivity” of the individual LAU. The combination of those two factors allows to calculate the po- tential territorial impact for each individual LAU (see Figure 6). • “Territorial Sensitivity” describes the baseline situation of the region according to its ability to cope with external effects. It is a characteristic of a region that can be described by different indicators regardless of the topic analyzed. • “Exposure” describes the intensity of the potential effect of the three infrastructure measures on a specific indicator. Exposure illustrates the experts ’ judgement, i.e. the main findings of the expert discussion at the TIA workshop. Figure 6. Exposure x territorial sensitivity = territorial impact Source: Autors, 2015. The result of the territorial impact assessment is presented in maps. The maps show the potential territorial impacts based on a combination of the expert judgement on exposure with the territorial sensitivity of a region, described by an indicator on LAU level. 36 3.1.3 Limitations of the outcome Several limitations in relation to the assessments made have to be pointed out to put the respective outcome in the right perspective in terms of further uptake in strategy development • Thematic broadness of the strategy: The strategy addresses 24 objectives (not including sub- objectives) in five Pillars, all of which had to be discussed in one single workshop. An effort was made to cover all objectives and pillars in order not to leave out crucial effects, which corre- spondingly leads to broad coverage but limited depth of the assessments. • Clarity of the actions: At the time of the assessment, the actions were in an early draft stage. The list was made available to the experts participating, however with the caveat of an early draft. • For Pillar 5 of the strategy focusing to a large extent on governance aspects, only an early draft was available at the time of the workshop. Consequently, assessments in relation to governance were only possible to a limited extent. • Data limitations: several of the effects discussed target issues, which are not, or only to a limited extent, depicted by existing indicators. While geographic resolution generally is good, thematic depth or collection/calculation methods lead to limitations in several instances. For instance data on employment, overnight stays or public transport. Nevertheless, all indicators are pro- vided by reliable public sources, mainly the territorial observatory of Romania. Thus, keeping in mind the respective limitations, the general reliability of the data is not in question. Based on the described limitation especially concerning the number of indicators available that could be used for the calculation of impacts the assessment was broadened by a further assessment based on literature review and expert analysis. 3.2 General description of the estimated benefits and costs as a result of the entry into force of the normative act The strategy itself is not tied to a concrete budget and thus does not lead to any changes to budgets, increase or decrease expenditures or require concrete changes to existing budgets. The implemen- tation of the strategy and funding of outlined measures is tied to various funding programs (e.g. Cohesion Programs or the CAP) and further legal and funding adaptations. Thus, the strategy itself does no cause direct costs or benefits. 3.3 Social impact (including impact on fundamental human rights and freedoms) 3.3.1 Reducing population loss in mountainous areas The common umbrella of all Pillars and Objectives of the Mountain Strategy is to improve the quality of life in mountain areas in order to keep people in mountain areas and to attract people living in mountain areas. Mountain areas should be an attractive place of living. In line with this overall goal of the Mountain Strategy, one of the main expected effects is to contribute to stabilizing the popu- lation in the region. This effect largely coincides with the potential to reduce the out-migration of residents, especially young professionals, by improving local infrastructure and accessibility. It is noteworthy that several aspects and effects mentioned in other areas are identified as preconditions or strong drivers supporting effects on societal aspects. In particular, positive economic develop- ments and improvements in connectivity are considered crucial. A reduction in out-migration is ex- pected to improve the long-term viability of peripheral communities that might otherwise struggle to maintain basic services for their local populations. 37 In the TIA workshop two indicators were selected to picture the effects of the Mountain strategy on population development: young demography and migration rate. “Youth-friendly Mountain villages” – reducing young out-migration in Swiss mountain regions A survey conducted by the Swiss Center for Mountain Regions revealed, up to 25% of residents of mountain municipalities cannot imagine living in the area in the future. As a reaction, the label for “youth friendly mountain villages” was introduced, encouraging the necessary developments (in- cluding infrastructure, services, housing, school/education and training and exchange formats) and supporting the active inclusion of young residents in policymaking. The label led to the improve- ments in municipalities such as Veysonnaz (550 inhabitants, main village situated at 1,200 MASL) introducing among other measures support for affordable housing in the form of a flat-sharing plat- form and associated financial support. In a village dominated by detached housing which would otherwise be unaffordable for young residents, this measure allows them to gain some level of independence from their parents without having to move to more distant areas with affordable small appartements. As a key success factor, the active involvement of the young residents in the design of the measures and also the certification process for the label is identified (SAB, 2022) TIA-indicator: Migration rate Reducing out-migration, although directly addressed as an objective of the Mountain Strategy, was considered to be one of the aspects depending on the overall successful implementation of the Strat- egy. If successfully implemented, a number of objectives and actions may combine to achieve this main objective. A complete reversal of the trend of out-migration from affected regions is unlikely, as regions strug- gling to provide basic services to their population are unlikely to become “pull” regions for people from outside. However, it may be possible to stabilize and reduce out-migration by retaining the local population and attracting individual in-migrants. Therefore, a number of elements are key, in particular the ability of upland areas to generate employment and income. Due to the variety of factors influencing this indicator, the experts of the workshop considered that the strategy has the potential to have strong beneficial effects. Even though the experts in the area of migration tend to assume a positive result (12 strong advantageous impact; 5 weak advantageous impact), it is noteworthy that 2 experts assume a strong disadvantageous impact 4. The indicator “Migration rate” represents the net migration within a specified time interval (2007 - 2021) by calculating the algebraic difference between the number of people immigrating and those emigrating due to changes in residence. It does not account for external immigration. It is assumed that regions with a higher migration rate would have a higher sensitivity to the Mountain Strategy. Based on the expert judgement and the given sensitivity, more than half (52%) of the municipalities are attributed potential for a very high positive impact. For 31%, a high impact is to be expected, and last but not least, 17% of the regions can expect a moderate positive impact. Map 1 shows the potential territorial impact in relation to migration rate. While patterns visible are diffuse in nature, lower potential impacts can generally be observed in large parts of the Apuseni mountains and the Făgăraș Group. For the Central group, strong regional level divergences can be identified, with both highest and lowest impact potentials concentrated in one group. The majority of the Parâng Group as well as the Northern Group and the Banatului and Poiana Rusca Mountains finally see the highest potentials for very high positive impacts. _ 4 The workshop discussions suggest, that those two participants misunderstood the voting exercise and meant to vote for a strong advantageous effect 38 Figure 7. Result of the expert judgement: Migration rate Source: Territorial impact assessment expert workshop, 21-22 September 2023 Map 1. Migration rate – expert judgement: Strong advantageous effect Source: Territorial impact assessment expert workshop, 21-22 September 2023 TIA-indicator: Young demography Young demography was the second indicator that was chosen to picture the effect of the Mountain Strategy on the population development. The indicator “Young demography” signifies the percentage of individuals with Romanian citizenship who reside within Romania’s territory as of January 1st of the reference year, restricted on the age group of 0 to 14 years. It is assumed that municipalities that have a higher share of young people could benefit stronger in keeping young people in the area. 39 Actions from various pillars are likely to positively influence this indicator. A key factor will be the effectiveness of improving local infrastructure as well as job opportunities. Spin-off effects of multi- use infrastructure developed mainly for tourism but benefiting local youth as well can be expected. Due to the multitude of factors positively influencing this indicator, 18 experts assessed that the Strategy could have a “strongly advantageous effect” and two assessed that it would at least have a “weakly advantageous effect”. Noone implied a negative effect of the Strategy on the share of young people. Figure 8. Result of the expert judgement: Young demography Source: Territorial impact assessment expert workshop, 21-22 September 2023 Map 2. Young demography – expert judgement: Strong advantageous effect Source: Territorial impact assessment expert workshop, 21-22 September 2023 40 Based on the expert judgement 42% of the regions could assume a very high positive impact, 40% a high positive impact and 18% a moderate positive impact. Map 2 shows the potential territorial impact in relation to young demography. On a broad scale, a clear east-west divide is visible from the resulting patterns, with highest impact potentials concentrated in the North, Central and South Group as well as the Făgăraș and Parâng Group. 3.3.2 Connectivity The Strategic Objective II: “Enhance Mountain Area residents’ connectivity in towns and rural areas” and especially Objective 5: “Enable Mountain residents’ mobility within and beyond the Mountain Area” address directly the need to improve access within the mountain area. When implementing the proposed actions, improved connectivity, both within the mountain regions and between the mountain regions and the lowlands, is a clear impact of the strategy. While improved transport connectivity is expected to bring significant benefits, it may also have potential negative consequences. Particularly in the peripheral regions of the mountain areas, better access to other parts of the country has the potential to tackle the loss of labor and contribute to value added within the region itself. This effect is particularly likely in the case of urban centers that are within easy reach of peripheral regions and act as a pull factor for labor. Infrastructure development Several case studies have shown that infrastructure development and connectivity projects have a positive impact on the associated regions. In the example of the Saulkrasti motorway bypass (Lat- via), this was reflected in reducing travelling time, improving safety separating long and short dis- tance traffic and diverting long-distance flows from more densely populated areas. In the case of the Rio Antirio Bridge in Greece, the project achieved its stated objectives of reducing travel time between Peloponnese and the mainland (European Commission, 2018, p.61-64). Public transport uptake As the proposed actions focus strongly on improving public transport, territorial effects in this field were assessed with an indicator on public transport uptake. The details of the indicator applied are presented in the sections below. In particular actions in relation to Pillar II are likely to improve the regional situation in relation to this indicator, as per design of the policy. Some spin-off effects from further actions, notably in relation to tourism and the touristic needs are expected, however mainly with limited spatial reach and linked to singular destinations. The experts underlined the caveat, that public transport in particular in mountain regions has only a limited share of the overall transport capacity, and informal transport needs to be taken into account as well. Nevertheless, the experts assessed, that the Strategy has the potential to exert strong advantageous effects. The indicator “Public transport uptake” represents the number of passengers using public road transport vehicles and metro services within a locality’s administrative -territorial area, relative to the total population. It combines passengers with tickets and those with season tickets, expressed as a proportion of the total population. Among the expert opinions, the expectation of a strong (14) or weak (5) advantageous effect of this aspect again predominates. However, one expert does not expect any significant impact from changes in the area of public transport. In the case of public transport, negative proportionality is assumed. This means that a lower base level in the respective region opens up a better development oppor- tunity for the mountain strategy. 41 Figure 9. Result of the expert judgement: Public transport uptake Source: Territorial impact assessment expert workshop, 21-22 September 2023 Map 3. Public transport uptake – expert judgement: Strong advantageous effect Source: Territorial impact assessment expert workshop, 21-22 September 2023 Map 3 shows the potential territorial impact in relation to public transport uptake. 63% of the ATU/LAU would benefit from a very high positive impact. Additionally, a high positive impact is ex- pected for 23% of the regions, while 14% would still benefit from at least a moderate positive impact. The patterns clearly highlight a relation between proximity to urban regions and deficits of public transport uptake throughout the mountain regions. Lowest impact potentials are concentrated in the Apuseni mountains well as the Făgăraș and Parâng Group, in particular in regions surrounding urban- ized regions such as Cluj, Sibiu, Brasov or close to Ploiești urban area. The majority of regions has a high potential positive impact in relation to public transport, indicating a strong gap and a clear urban/suburban-rural divide. The potential territorial impacts thus do show a clear concentration of 42 lower impact potentials and an abundance of regions with very high impact potentials indicating a strong need for action. 3.3.3 Healthcare Objective 1: “Improve Mountain residents’ access to quality healthcare, education, and other social services in Mountain “hub” towns and rural areas” target at the development of access to healthcare. Especially the measures 1.1 “Developing community heal th and social assistance centers in Mountain hub towns” and 1.2 “Establishing telehealth, mobile health, and elder care in remote parts of the Mountain Area” support actions to improve the quality of supply in rural remote areas. These proposed improvements result in better access to health services, which is important given the severe shortage of health workers throughout the mountain regions. A key aspect in this respect is related to improved digital connectivity, which is likely to improve access to services such as tele- medicine, which can address this shortage. TIA-indicator: doctors available for the population A key indicator describing the effect in relation to the broader health care system is the number of doctors in relation to the total population. (The indicator “doctors available”” refers to the count of doctors (excluding dentists) who apply modern medical principles to study, diagnose, treat, and pre- vent various human ailments in relation to the total population.) The issue of health care is directly addressed in Pillar I of the Mountain Strategy, but some spin-off effects of Pillar II related to digitalization and telemedicine are also relevant. The availability of a doctor in a community is one aspect of a basic health care supply. However, further aspects have to be taken into account. Including the connectivity and the, actual availability (i.e. opening hours, 24-hour services, etc.). Both aspects cannot be addressed by the available indi- cator. Therefore, in the workshop the experts considered that the strategy has the potential to have strong beneficial effects, but several caveats need to be made regarding the actual availability and accessibility of services to all citizens. Figure 10. Result of the expert judgement: Doctors available Source: Territorial impact assessment expert workshop, 21-22 September 2023 There is widespread agreement among the experts that the implementation of the Mountain strategy would have a positive effect. 12 experts assume a strong advantageous effect, 7 a weak advantageous 43 effect and 1 expert expects no impact. It is assumed that the fewer doctors are available at the moment, the greater the assumed impact of the Mountain Strategy could be. Map 4 shows the potential territorial impact in relation to doctors available as a proxy for healthcare provision in general. It is evident from the map, that no clear regional differentiation can be identi- fied. The majority of overall regions (3/4 of all regions) have the potential for very high positive impacts, indicating a distinctive gap throughout all massifs. Strikingly, urban proximity does not change the impact potentials, thus even the majority of regions close to urban areas (or even in urban areas) does experience similar gaps. 14% would benefit from a high positive impact and 11% from a moderate positive impact. Map 4. Doctors available – expert judgement: Strong advantageous effect Source: Territorial impact assessment expert workshop, 21-22 September 2023 3.3.4 Educational attainment Objective 1 “Improve Mountain residents’ access to quality healthcare, education, and other soci al services in Mountain “hub” towns and rural areas” and therein especially the measures 1.1 ”Devel- oping community health and social assistance centers in Mountain hub towns” and 1.3 “Developing daycare, kindergarten, after-school programming, and innovative schooling models in Mountain rural areas” address directly measures for improving education. Therefore, the strategy has the potential to improve educational facilities and programs. The proposed actions focus on the pupils in the pri- mary and secondary education concentrating on remote areas, where there is a lack of day-care, kindergarten and after school facilities. Thus, there will be less impact in higher education. Consequently, there is potential to reduce urban-rural disparities beyond the suburban regions if adequate funding can be secured. Younger residents are likely to benefit significantly from the strat- egy, as multiple impacts target areas relevant to them, including education, connectivity and em- ployment opportunities. 44 Georgian development of high mountain regions Georgian mountain regions have, as many others across the world, been suffering from continuous out-migration, limited economic development potentials and lack of services. As a consequence, lacking attractiveness for professions in the education- and healthcare sector (as in other sectors) led to a gap in needs and supply of teachers and medical staff. The quality of services provided by those sectors therefore saw declines against the overall upward trend of the country. A system introduced by the government building on the new Mountain Law in 2015 provided financial incen- tives for professionals working in healthcare or education in defined “high mountain regions”, in- creasing salaries by 20-35%. Evaluations found these bonuses to provide sufficient incentives to improve the attractiveness of the mountain regions. Initial positive dynamics observed are esti- mated to lead to long-term reverse of the negative development trends (CDE 2019) 3.4 The macroeconomic impact (including the impact on the business environment) Pillar III: Green and Competitive Place-Based Economy directly addresses the economic development of the Mountain Area-in voracious fields including agriculture and agrifood value chains, the mountain forest bioeconomy, tourism and the development of smart specialization industries across sectors, especially taking into account SMEs. Thus, the Mountain Strategy is likely to have a wide range of economic impacts, with a strong focus on the dominant sectors of tourism, agriculture and forestry. In the TIA Workshop discussions on the overall impact of the strategy were diverse. While a wide range of potential impacts were considered, two primary sectors, tourism and agriculture, were ex- pected to have the strongest impacts. Forestry was recognized as a third key sector, although the experts acknowledged that the impacts of the strategy could be limited by structural and legal factors related to the forestry industry. Economic diversification is an explicit objective of the strategy and is generally expected to stimulate innovation and wider economic prosperity. The objectives related to the green economy were identified as leading to an improvement in relation to agrotourism, promoting the timber industry and facilitating the operation of leisure businesses. These overall effects are subject to several interdependencies. In particular, the general economic stimulation was identified as a critical precondition for attracting people to settle in mountain areas, which in turn was seen as a precondition for promoting economic diversification outside the existing key sectors. 3.4.1 Agriculture, Forestry and Industry Especially Objective 7: “Enable profitable and competitive Mountain agrifood value chains” targets on the improvement of economic sector of agriculture by supporting agrifood producers’ capacity to competitively supply (local) markets, supporting value addition, stimulating demand for Mountain agrifood products and helping agrifood actors access public subsidies and technical assistance. Ob- jective 8: “Strengthening economic opportunities in the mountain forest bioeconomy (and the non- food bioeconomy at large)” is focusing on the support of the development of forestry, whereas Ob- jective 10: “Support SMEs, entrepreneurship, and the development of smart specialization industries across sectors industry” addresses support for other sectors of the industry. The territorial impact of agriculture, forestry and industry can be assessed by two main indicators, namely employment and entrepreneurship in the respective sectors. Both indicators of the territorial observatory combine agriculture, forestry and industry. So the analysis of both indicators combines these three sectors. Consequently, the experts of the TIA workshop noted that although both agri- culture and forestry are addressed by the strategy, measures related to agriculture seem to have a 45 greater potential for positive impacts. This is mainly due to the fact that they are already linked to other sectors by the strategy, whereas forestry is still considered as a separate sector. Agritourism and the marketing of agricultural products to tourists and for sale outside the mountain areas have the potential to gradually improve the situation of agricultural entrepreneurs and also to improve the income generation of very small farms. This positive effect of supporting agriculture was e.g. documented for the Austrian agricultural sec- tor. Even though the was an extensification of farming, there has been an increase in production and producer surplus as well as in the volume of employment in agriculture. Moreover, the results show that the impact of the program was not only strong in those regions to which a lot of funds flow directly. Due to the economic interdependence through the purchase of inputs and the induced ef- fects from the changed use of income, those regions in which only a few beneficiaries of the program are located also benefit. (WIFO, “Interim assessment of the effects of the Rural Development Program Development Programme 2014-2020”2019, p. 77 + 98) The impacts on forestry, on the other hand, are considered to be an improvement compared to the business-as-usual scenario. The impacts on industry can be considered as more limited, as the strat- egy does not emphasize these aspects strongly. For both indicators, the experts consider that the strategy has the potential to generate strong beneficial effects, but emphasize that this is particu- larly relevant for the agricultural aspects and less pronounced for forestry and industry. The potential territorial impacts do not show a strong clustering effect, with potentially high positive impacts spread across the different massifs. However, a slight concentration of potential positive effects can be observed in relation to entrepreneurship. Employment – Agriculture, Forestry, Industry The indicator “Employment – Agriculture, Forestry, Industry” depicts those employees actively in- volved in income-generating roles within these three sectors. This encompasses individuals engaged in contractual employment or self-employment, with income derived from sources such as wages and payment in kind. (This category does not include military personnel, prisoners, or individuals em- ployed by political and public organizations.) The metric is presented as a percentage of the overall employed workforce. It is supposed that regions with a higher employment rate in these three sectors will also respond better to measures targeting these sectors. In this particular field, the experts of the workshop foresee a solely positive impact, with 16 holding a strong advantageous outlook and 4 expressing a weak advantageous effect. Figure 11. Result of the expert judgement: Employers – Agriculture, Forestry, Industry Source: Territorial impact assessment expert workshop, 21-22 September 2023 46 Map 5 shows the potential territorial impact in relation to economic development taking into account the employment in the Agriculture, Forestry and Industry sector. 60% of the ATUs/LAUSs are assumed to have a very high positive impact. Another 27% are expected to have a high positive impact and 13% a moderate positive impact. Territorial patterns emerging do not show a differentiation by mas- sif, however a difference in potential impacts between central mountain regions and the fringes of the Mountain Area can be identified. Complementarity between those patterns and tourism regions can be identified in a cross-comparison. Map 5. Employment – Agriculture, Forestry, Industry – expert judgement: Strong advantageous effect Source: Territorial impact assessment expert workshop, 21-22 September 2023 Entrepreneurship – Agriculture, Forestry, Industry The indicator “Entrepreneurship – Agriculture, Forestry, Industry” counts active enterprises engaged in producing goods or services during the observation period and reports them by industry according to NACE Rev. 2 in Agriculture, Forestry, and Industry sectors. Along with a higher indicator value per region, a higher sensitivity towards the mountain strategy is assumed. According to the experts, the projected effect is clearly advantageous, as 14 experts expect a strong and 6 a weak advantageous effect. Map 6 shows the potential territorial impact in relation to economic development taking into account the entrepreneurship in the Agriculture, Forestry and Industry sector. A very high positive impact is also expected in 56% of the surveyed regions, a high positive impact is expected for 25% and a mod- erate positive impact for 19%. Contrasting the patterns visible for employment, the potential impacts in relation to individual enterprises unveils lower probability of positive impacts in the Banatului and Poiana Rusca Mountains as well as Retezat, Parâng and Parts of Bucegi Group. On the other hand, Apuseni Mountains as well as Făgăraș and Nordic Group are particularly positively impacted. 47 Figure 12. Result of the expert judgement: Entrepreneurship – Agriculture, Forestry, Industry Source: Territorial impact assessment expert workshop, 21-22 September 2023 Map 6. Entrepreneurship – Agriculture, Forestry, Industry – expert judgement: Strong advantageous effect Source: Territorial impact assessment expert workshop, 21-22 September 2023 Three key limitations of the indicator have to be taken into account nonetheless. First of all, the number of enterprises, is considered, but not the size (neither in terms of employees nor turnover). Secondly, very small farms and subsistence agriculture are in most cases not covered by the indicator and thus create a biased view on the distribution of farms. Finally, location of the enterprise is usually accurate for industrial sectors, however does not necessarily coincide with the actual fields or forests utilized by agriculture- or forestry sector. 48 3.4.2 Territorial effects on tourism The experts highlighted tourism as an important driver of economic prosperity and growth in moun- tain areas. The existing cultural landscape has significant economic potential as it contributes to the high-quality landscape and natural capital of the region. This in turn is likely to have spin-off effects for tourism as a key marketing approach. Consequently, the improvement of tourism is directly ad- dressed by Objective 9 of the Mountain Strategy “Increase the economic weight of Mountain tourism”. Agricultural regions in particular are likely to benefit from additional marketing potential and im- proved green tourism. Tourism Additionally to Objective 9, tourism can benefit from multiple further development ad- dressed in the Mountain Strategy, as impacts, e.g. the improvement of natural capital through Pillar IV or improving connectivity through Pillar II. In turn, tourism-related infrastructure improvements are likely to improve the local population’s access to several key infrastructures, including transport, but also leisure. In the TIA workshop the territorial impact of tourism was assessed using three main indicators, namely overnight stays, employment and turnover in the tourism sector. Oltenia de sub Munte: Romanian region aspires to become a UNESCO Geopark The key to a successful transition into long-term development in mountainous areas is dependent on the availability of funding that can be accessed and local innovation. Oltenia de sub Munte, a region located in southern Romania, is a prime example of this phenomenon. The Kogayon Associa- tion has been working diligently to achieve UNESCO geopark status for this region. The economic potential of Oltenia de sub Munte is closely intertwined with its aspirations to become a UNESCO geopark, as the process of earning the designation is more important than the designation itself. Over the past few years, public funding amounting to more than EUR 150 million has been predom- inantly allocated towards enhancing the road infrastructure in Oltenia de sub Munte. This invest- ment has greatly improved the accessibility of the region's attractions, laying the groundwork for potential expansion in tourism. Nevertheless, further funding is necessary to ensure the region's growth is sustained and enhanced, particularly in the development of water and sewage infrastruc- ture. The geopark project owes its success to the unwavering support of the community, as demon- strated by surveys that boast a 96% approval rate. This robust and enthusiastic collaboration among locals has laid a solid groundwork for the Oltenia de sub Munte project. This partnership between the community and the project is paving the way for a prosperous future in the region, where economic potential is in harmony with sustainable development. (Fodor, 2023) Overnight stays in hotels/capita The indicator “Overnight stays in hotels/capita” depicts the number of overnight stays in tourist accommodations. An overnight stay is each night for which a person is registered in a tourist accom- modation establishment, whether or not physically present in the room and is expressed relative to population. As the Mountain Strategy is tapping on the improvement of existing tourist structures and potentials regions with a higher number of overnight stays per capita are expected to be affected higher than regions with less existing tourism. Sensitivity is thus directly proportional to the number of overnight stays per capita. 19 of the 20 experts participating in the TIA workshop attributed a strong, advantageous effect on “overnight stays in hotels/capita”. Only one expert expected a weak advantageous effect. 49 Figure 13. Result of the expert judgement: Overnight stays in hotels/capita Source: Territorial impact assessment expert workshop, 21-22 September 2023 Map 7. Overnight stays in hotels/capita – expert judgement: Strong advantageous effect Source: Territorial impact assessment expert workshop, 21-22 September 2023 Map 7 shows the potential territorial impact in relation to touristic development taking into account overnight stays per capita. It combines the expert judgement of a strong advantageous effect with the given sensitivity of regions. The majority of regions (63%) has potential for a minor positive impact in this regard, with further 20% expecting a high, and 17% a very high positive impact. The highest potential impacts are clustered in four main regions in the Apuseni Mountains, the Nordic Group, the Parâng Group and at the intersection of the Bucegi and Făgăraș Group. In comparison with the further tourism indicators, a much clearer concentration can be identified, thus highlighting key benefitting 50 regions. Nevertheless, limitations in relation to irregular overnight stays not counted by the indicator applied have to be taken into consideration in interpreting the map. Turnover in the hotels and restaurants sector The indicator “Turnover in the hotels and restaurants sector” is a financial metric, which sums up the revenue from selling goods, merchandise, services, and includes discounts and allowances given to customers in hotels and restaurants. As the Mountain Strategy is tapping on the improvement of existing tourist structures and potentials it is alleged that regions with a higher turnover in the hotel and restaurant sector are expected to be affected higher than regions with a lower turnover. There- fore, the level of sensitivity rises in direct proportion to the turnover within the hotels and restaurant sector. Limitations of the indicator are given as it does not include informal tourism. The majority of workshop participants agreed that turnover in the hotel and restaurant sector will tend to have a beneficial effect (13 strongly advantageous, 6 weakly advantageous). Only one expert was concerned about a weak disadvantageous effect. Figure 14. Result of the expert judgement: Turnover in the hotels and restaurants sector Source: Territorial impact assessment expert workshop, 21-22 September 2023 Map 8 illustrates the potential territorial implications of the Mountain Strategy concerning the turn- over in the hotels and restaurants sector combining expert opinions of a substantial beneficial impact with the regions’ established sensitivity. Nearly half of the regions (48%) have potential for a high positive impact in this regard, with further 23% expecting a very high, and 29% a moderate positive impact. The potentials are considered highest in the Apuseni Mountains as well as in the Mountain Regions close to Sibiu, Brasov and on the Brasov-Bucharest axis. While further indicators imply a high im- portance of tourism throughout the region, turnover seems to be concentrated in a lower number of key benefitting regions. This nevertheless does not diminish the local importance tourism might have in municipalities even when overall turnover is lower. Peripheral, non-urban or close-to-urban-re- gions generally have an expectation of lower turnover based on these assessments. 51 Map 8. Turnover in the hotels and restaurants sector – expert judgement: Strong advantageous effect Source: Territorial impact assessment expert workshop, 21-22 September 2023 Employment – Hotels and restaurants The positive effects in tourism will include effects concerning the employment in hotels and restau- rants. The indicator “Employment – Hotels and restaurants” represents the proportion of the civilian workforce engaged in income-generating roles within the hotel and restaurant sector. This encom- passes individuals working under contracts, engaging in self-employment, freelancing, or contributing as unpaid family workers. It includes various income sources such as wages and payment in kind. Notably, this category excludes military personnel, prisoners, and employees of political and public organizations. Regions with a higher concentration of employment in the hotel and restaurant sector are anticipated to benefit from the Mountain Strategy. Sensitivity to this effect is directly linked to the level of employment within these sectors. The majority of the experts participating in the TIA workshop concurred that a significant workforce presence in the hotel and restaurant industry tends to yield positive outcomes, with 11 experts ex- pecting a strong advantageous effect and 8 expressing a weak advantageous effect. One expert held a contrary view, anticipating a weak disadvantageous effect. The subsequent map illustrates the potential territorial impact of the Mountain Strategy. Map 9 shows the potential territorial impact in relation to the employment in the hotels and restau- rants sector incorporating expert judgments of a strong positive effect alongside regional sensitivity levels. A predominant share of regions (43%) displays potential for a high positive impact, with an additional 35% expecting a very high positive effect and 22% anticipating a moderate positive impact. 52 Figure 15. Result of the expert judgement: Employers – Hotels and restaurants Source: Territorial impact assessment expert workshop, 21-22 September 2023 Map 9. Employment – Hotels and restaurants – expert judgement: Strong advantageous effect Source: Territorial impact assessment expert workshop, 21-22 September 2023 Similar to turnover limitations of the indicator were raised by the participants, as it is only able to depict a subset of the touristic happenings in the area. No clear clusters of high or low impact po- tentials are emerging from the map, but rather regions with very high potential impact are scattered throughout all massifs, both close and distant to urban areas. Strikingly, the patterns indicate a higher potential impact in central mountain regions as compared to regions at the fringes of the Mountain Area. 53 3.4.3 Attracting investments from outside The experts participating in the workshop stressed that the strategy is likely to attract the interest of investors from outside the mountain areas by increasing local innovation. Improving the conditions for private-public investment cooperation through a coherent strategy, especially for tourism and larger projects, is crucial in this respect. These conditions are likely to attract additional investment over and above the funding available at EU and national level, thus contributing to economically viable structural projects. This would further contribute to a positive economic development. 3.4.4 Higher public income A key effect of improved economic development highlighted by the experts is furthermore the in- crease in local budgets through higher tax revenues. This increased revenue can not only stimulate economic growth, but also increase the independence of local governments, allowing them to better respond to the needs of their communities. As a result, positive spill-over effects in terms of social infrastructure are expected to benefit smaller peripheral communities in particular. 3.5 The impact on the environment The Strategic Objective IV of the Mountain Strategy “Protect, restore, and nurture the integrity, health, and resilience of Mountain ecosystems and biodiversity ” under Pillar IV: “Respect for Nature” directly addresses the environmental status of the mountain area. Consequently, the implementation of the Strategy can contribute to a number of environmental impacts, some of which are interrelated with other environmental impacts, or more broadly with impacts in other areas. A Strategic Environ- mental Impact Assessment (SEA) was conducted analyzing the impacts of the Mountain Strategy on the environment. Consequently, the section “The impact on the environment” is not further elabo- rated in the ex-ante impact assessment to avoid any duplication of work. 3.6 Assessing the costs and benefits from the perspective of innovation and digitization Digital connectivity was identified as a key factor in attracting people from urban areas to mountain regions. Consequently, the Mountain strategy Addresses this issue in Objective 6: “Enable more Moun- tain Area residents to benefit from internet access.” This overall objective is broken down into three proposed measures: Measure 6.1. “Expanding internet infrastructure in small towns and rural areas” supports actions to strengthen the internet (broadband) infrastructure in rural areas. Measure 6.2. “Endowing communities with equipment for internet access” aims at developing further access point to high-speed internet in remote rural areas. Measure 6.3. “Develop Mountain Area residents’ digital competences” focuses on strengthening the internet-skills of the people and potential users. Addi- tionally, Measure 1.2. “Establishing telehealth, mobile health, and elder care in remote parts of the Mountain Area” under Objective 1: “Improve Mountain residents’ access to quality healthcare, edu- cation, and other social services in Mountain “hub” towns and rural areas” focus on developing the supply of health-related internet services. Implementing these objectives and measures can support a positive development on the mountain areas. A good access to high-speed internet is a location factor for people and business. It can make living in rural areas more attractive to urban citizens with the option to work remotely. As urban dwellers are unlikely to change or leave their jobs in the short term, teleworking is seen as a key component in retaining and attracting talent. This provides an opportunity for growth beyond the primary sector and tourism, as knowledge and innovation in a variety of fields can – in the long term – open up opportunities in sectors not yet established in mountain regions. 54 Moreover, collaboration between businesses is expected to benefit from digitalization, especially when it goes beyond the primary sector. Enhanced digital connectivity provides rural enterprises with the opportunity to amplify their productivity by implementing advanced technologies, such as preci- sion agriculture, smart logistics, and augmented reality applications. This includes chances in digital marketing, which could be crucial for long-term growth in tourism-related sub-sectors. These effects were already recognized during the development of the enlargement of Vodafone's network in Roma- nia (Deloitte LLP, 2021). Particularly in the peripheral regions of the mountain areas, better access to other parts of the country has the potential to contribute to a loss of labor and value added within the region itself. This effect is particularly likely in the case of urban centers that are within easy reach of peripheral regions and act as a pull factor for labor. However, improvements in digital connectivity can bridge further distances and create such “drowning” effects outside the peripheral regions and into more remote areas. The costs of digitalization activities in line with the Mountain Strategy cannot be defined at this stage, as the strategy itself is not tied to a concrete budget and thus does not lead to any changes to budgets, increase or decrease expenditures or require concrete changes to existing budgets. The implementation of the strategy and funding of outlined measures is tied to various funding programs (e.g. Cohesion Programs or the CAP) and further legal and funding adaptations. Thus, the strategy itself does no cause direct costs or benefits. 3.7 Other information 3.7.1 Increasing implementation capacities trough governance Successful implementation of the Mountain Strategy will require significant efforts at local and other levels of government. The capacity of public authorities to implement the elements related to their area of responsibility is key to bring the various elements to the ground. Taking into account the specific circumstances and challenges of mountain areas, local and regional expertise is needed to implement the strategy effectively and according to local needs. Consequently, the Mountain Strat- egy addresses governance by an own Pillar (Pillar V: Mountain Empowerment (Representative and Supportive Government) and accordingly with the Strategic Objective V: “Empower the Mountain Area to determine and pursue its own aspirations”. One of the likely impacts of the Strategy in the governance area is the improvement of administrative capacity at local and regional level. As these authorities are tasked with implementing the Mountain Strategy in different areas, their capacity to translate its principles into concrete actions and to support local actors in their respective implementation efforts is expected to increase. This, in turn, fosters impacts beyond the immediate scope of the Strategy, particularly in the implementation of elements such as the EU Structural Funds. However, capacity problems are common and it may be difficult to take on significant new and inno- vative tasks to support implementation at local level. Measures improving the governance help to avoid a overburdening of public authorities with the relevant tasks. A key governance effect of the strategy is the expected increase in the capacities of local and regional government to fulfil their tasks in a subsidiary way. This effect is closely linked to the strategy’s impact on economic development. As economic activity in upland areas generates higher tax reve- nues, local and regional authorities will become more financially independent and better able to support activities beyond their core functions. The economic growth resulting from these activities not only strengthens local budgets, but also con- tributes to the development of local expertise and administrative capacity, in particular with regard to access to funding from public and private sources. This positive feedback is likely to improve the quality of projects and proposals submitted for funding. If local authorities are able to clearly identify and 55 (administratively) support projects that are in line with the objectives of the strategy, the likelihood of their successful funding and implementation increases. 3.7.2 Improved access to finance and investment opportunities During the territorial impact assessment workshop, the access to funding in Mountain areas was dis- cussed. Funding gaps for a broad range of activities were pronounced in the Mountain Areas and connected to the special circumstances and constraints. Adding to those constraints, local authorities are less likely than in other parts of the country to have the capacity to access such funding oppor- tunities. Of note, this effect is to a lesser extent a Mountain-Lowlands disparity as rather an Urban- Rural disparity. Generally larger administrative bodies tend to have increased administrative capac- ities for such activities, and at the same time the respective regions provide better preconditions to actively support funded activities. Although the strategy does not provide funding per se, it is likely to lead indirectly to increased access to funding for local projects, which may help to kick-start innovative endeavors. The efficient economic use of natural capital, including forests, pastures and grasslands, is expected to improve through strategically coordinated approaches and better access to finance. Local projects are crucial in this respect, as they play a key role in keeping added value within communities and counteracting the risk of knowledge and innovation drain. Measure 15.3 “Establish specific mechanisms to help Mountain stakeholders access available public funding and technical resources and handle adminis- trative requirement” proposes actions to increase the amount of funding received in mountain areas e.g. through grant-writing and administrative assistance entities, development of a mechanism for coordinating funding requests from Mountain stakeholders or training grant writing for local actors. These activities support the increase of incoming funding into the mountain area. If capacity building for local authorities and increased resources are targeted by the strategy, it has the potential to exert strong advantageous effects as per the experts assessments. In order to depict the potential impact of the Mountain Strategy on the access to funding, the indi- cator of the territorial observatory “funding from national programs cleared” was chosen by the experts of the TIA workshop as a proxy indicating the regions capacities to attract and access funds stimulating local level development. This indicator quantifies the proportion of funding obtained from national programs in relation to the local budget that has been approved. It is assumed that regions with a lower share of funding from national programs at the moment are expected to catch up by the supporting measures and thus would be affected more positively than regions that are already firm with funding opportunities. Without much objection, the experts agree on an advantageous effect of the Mountain Strategy in this respect: 16 strongly advantageous and 4 in favor of a weak advantageous effect. Map 10 shows the likely territorial impact for funding potentials depicted via funding from national programs as a proxy. Here, a very high positive impact is expected for 57%, which is complemented by 28% regions with a high positive impact and 15% with a minor positive impact. Concerning the territorial pattern, no clear regional clusters are emerging and potentials for both high and low im- pacts are scattered throughout the map. Some slightly higher potentials can be identified though in the Retezat Group and the Banatului and Poiana Rusca Mountains. Notably, 2/3 of all regions have the potential for very high positive impacts, thus indicating a pronounced gap in funding access in the past 56 Figure 16. Result of the expert judgement: Funding from national programs cleared Source: Territorial impact assessment expert workshop, 21-22 September 2023 Map 10. Funding from national programs cleared – expert judgement: Strong advantageous effect Source: Territorial impact assessment expert workshop, 21-22 September 2023 57 4 The financial impact of the Strategy Methodological approach of the ex-ante assessment: The ex-ante assessment implemented the review of potential funding sources from EU funding identifying potential thematic overlaps and theoretically available funds. The review was based on crossing intervention fields from all relevant ESI funds on national level (all programs) and regional level (all programs except Bucharest-Ilfov), all intervention fields of the CAP Strategic Plan and all measures of the NRRP. The assessment fo- cuses on potential thematic overlaps, however could not consider the already committed or spent resources. Some gaps thus might arise where concrete availability of funding is not given under all circumstances. Contribution to the strategy development: the ex-ante assessment conducted the full review for funding sources as well as for indicators in consultation with the strategy drafting team and provided the corresponding sections to the strategy. Uptake of the recommendation and remaining recommendation: The information provided by the ex-ante assessment was fully taken up by the strategy. The strategy itself is not tied to a concrete budget and thus does not lead to any changes to budgets, increase or decrease expenditures or require concrete changes to existing budgets. The implemen- tation of the strategy and funding of outlined measures is tied to various funding programs (e.g. Cohesion Programmes or the CAP). The respective potential funding sources are identified below. The strategy has been brought to the attention of the respective Managing Authorities and the re- spective measures and envisaged projects have been outlined. It is in the discretion of the Managing Authorities though to make any concrete funding decisions which have to be in line with their regu- lations and guidelines on project selection and funding. Some funding gaps could nevertheless be identified which can be addressed by the programs in the subsequent programming periods (post 2027). 4.1 General recommendations for implementing the strategy Short term measures • Review of available budgets and capacity by Managing Authorities for implementation of projects in mountainous regions could provide a realistic picture of the status quo and build the basis for a roadmap towards the end of the programming period 2021-2027. Such a roadmap can provide valuable information for intermediaries and supporting institutions when guiding potential bene- ficiaries or authorities in general linked to project development. • Information and awareness raising for program authorities is required to effectively support the implementation of the Strategy. Within the limits of the established administrative procedures and selection criteria for projects, those projects from mountainous regions could be particularly supported. This could entail information campaigns as well as targeted support outlined below for applicants. Medium term measures • Key limitations for mountain regions when trying to access funding are linked to the implemen- tation provisions of the respective funds. This includes e.g. selection criteria related to the ef- fectiveness of measures outlining the amount of population potentially benefiting from a specific measure. Such selection criteria do take into account the national level needs in prioritization, however carry the potential to disregard the local/regional level needs. An adjustment of these selection criteria – to the extent allowed by the European policy framework – is recommended for the post 2027 programming period of EU funds. This can include e.g. territorial provisions for 58 specific measures, or general adjustment of the weight of such factors disadvantaging the moun- tain regions from the outset. • Specific objectives of the strategy should be taken into account when designing the post 2027 EU funding framework and funding programs. While in general the level of alignment is already high in the current programming period, the specific circumstances of mountainous regions still re- quire specific adjustments to setting priorities and objectives. The specific sectoral structure of mountain regions for example currently leads to a dependence on the CAP funding for multiple activities, which could be addressed by ERDF programs as well. • The alignment of the post 2027 funding framework is already required at the start of programming efforts in the years 2025/2026. The strategy thus can be taken into consideration from an early point onwards creating a high impact potential. Supporting measures • Key limitations in accessing funding have been identified in relation to the capacities of potential beneficiaries/applicants to fulfil the administrative requirements and develop successful project applications. It is thus recommended to further develop supporting structures capable of guiding and assisting these potential beneficiaries for the ongoing as well as for the future programming period. • An integrated support structure is beneficial for successful implementation of the integrated strategy. Administrative structures beyond the immediate funds concerned should be considered and capacity building activities supported, which allow the respective Managing Authorities (and other program bodies) to support beyond their respective fields and guide potential applicants. • Existing bodies such as Regional Development Agencies, the National Mountain Agency, LAGs and other institutions could act as such supporting bodies outside of their respective official capaci- ties as Managing Authorities (where applicable). 4.2 Funding review and input provided to the strategy A set of funding sources is available, in theory, to support themes or initiatives proposed by the Strategy, more specifically the EU funding to Romania in the current programmatic cycle 2023-2027, particularly through the Partnership Agreement (Cohesion Policy), the Resilient and Recovery Facility (RRF) and the Common Agriculture Policy (CAP), as well as some sources at national level. Most of the actions linked to these funds are not currently explicitly targeted at the Mountain Areas but cover, to a large extent, the set of measures proposed by the Strategy. Therefore, to the extent that Mountain stakeholders can have access to those funds, the Strategy’s funding builds on existing fund- ing frameworks. Nevertheless, the lack of focus on the Mountain Area requires increased attention from the various funds. Several high-level EU and national strategies (as mentioned in Chapter 3) already call for special attention to be paid to (rural) Mountain communities and support measures linked to their specific needs. At present, Mountain communities in particular face considerable difficulties in ac- cessing funding for specific themes, due to several barriers to access, including those related criteria for application and evaluation of proposals. Clear recommendations are presented in more detail, under Section 8.3 to address these issues in the forthcoming reviews and reprogramming cycles, as well as in the new programming period after 2027. 4.3 Possible Sources of Financing The following section corresponds to the report “Draft Outline Integrated Strategy for the Develop- ment of Romania’s Mountain Area: 2023-2035” delivered on 10.11.2023 contains an assessment of 59 potential funding sources for the implementation of the strategy which show a thematic link to the objectives and measures of the Strategy. These thematic links have been established based on the available information related to intervention fields of the corresponding programmes, the priorities set and the potential beneficiaries outlined. The assessment shows the potential correlations, how- ever no information related to the concrete implementation status, progress of the individual pro- grammes or upcoming thematic calls could be taken into account. Nevertheless, considerable the- matic overlap between the Strategy and the available funding sources could be established which can be further explored in implementation in the short term. Furthermore, medium-term measures on program level as well as supporting measures for an effective implementation could be identified as outlined below. A set of potential funding sources has been identified for the various objectives and measures pro- posed by the Mountain Area Strategy. A detailed overview of these links between funding sources and respective programs is presented in Annex 5. The table in the annex shows the funds that can poten- tially contribute to the objectives of the Strategy based on the selected intervention areas or prior- ities and investments. The analysis covers both national and regional programs, so it must be stressed that not all potential links apply to the territory covered by the Mountain Area. Furthermore, the analysis only indicates potential synergies based on the thematic focus of the re- spective programs. In several cases, programs/plans designed before the preparation of the draft outline Strategy may contribute to its objectives. On the other hand, in some cases, allocations may already exceed the available budget for a specific priority or intervention area and no additional projects contributing to the Strategy can be implemented under this specific program. The following sections present the potential synergies identified at the program level. 4.3.1 EU Funds For the period 2021-2027, the European Commission's programming covers the EU's overarching pri- orities and budget allocations, with a strong focus on key priority areas and funding categories. In addition to the long-established funds from previous periods, new sources of funding have emerged, partly linked to existing programs and partly implemented through new programs, mainly linked to the efforts to overcome ongoing crises and to develop into a resilient Union fit for further emerging challenges. In particular, the Recovery and Resilience Facility is the largest additional source of funding. In addition, new rules for the CAP have removed the EAFRD, and thus the rural development aspect, from the funds covered by the Common Provisions Regulation, and grouped the former rural development programs under the CAP Strategic Plan, together with CAP direct payments and sectoral programs. In total, the Romanian allocation of funds from these sources amounts to over EUR 76 billion (Figure 17), consisting of: • EUR 15.8 billion through the CAP funds for the 2021-2027 period, as part of its collaborative agreement with the Commission – National Strategic Plan (PNS 2023-2027) • EUR 31.5 billion through the Cohesion Policy for the 2021-2027 period, as part of its Partnership Agreement with the Commission. • EUR 29.1 billion through National Resilience and Recovery Plan (PNRR until 2026). 60 Figure 17. European Funds to Romania, 2023-2027 National Strategic Plan for Partnership Agreement 2021-2027 National Resilience and CAP 2023-2027 (CF, ERDF, ESF+, EMFAF, JT) Recovery Plan EUR 15.8 billion. EUR 31.5 billion. EUR 29.1 billion. Sustainable Social Smart Health Development Inclusion and Growth and EUR 14.2 billion EUR 14.9 billion Dignity Digitalisation grants loans EUR 5.25 bn EUR 4.11 bn EUR 2.20 bn EUR 3.88 bn Technical Education Transport Just Assistance and Transition Employment EUR 0.96 bn EUR 4.32 bn EUR 9.68 bn EUR 2.53 bn 8 Regional Programs EUR 8.92 billion Source: Elaboration based on the data available on MARD and MIPE sites Some of these funds are only loans. Overall, these funds are intended to promote economic, social and territorial cohesion throughout the country, facilitating its transition to a more environmentally conscious and digitally advanced nation. In addition, both national and regional programs will be implemented in a complementary manner during the current programming period. The Partnership Agreement (PA) for Romania for the programming period 2021-2027 aims at ensuring synergies and complementarities between the European funds and the programs through which they are implemented. It covers the 5 policy objectives related to the "Common Provisions Regulation" (Regulation (EU) 1060/2021) as well as the Just Transition objectives. The PA creates the necessary framework for synergies with the National Recovery and Resilience Plan (PNRR), with implications for appropriate coordination between the Recovery and Resilience Mechanism and the operational programs, under cohesion policy, established within it, as well as with the actions of the National CAP Strategic Plan (PNS). The Ministry of Investment and European Projects is responsible for moni- toring the implementation of the PA and the PNRR, thus avoiding overlap or duplication of funding. Coordination with the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MARD) is implemented to en- sure the same level of control in relation to the implementation of the National CAP Strategic Plan. 4.3.2 EU – National level programs under the Partnership Agreement (Cohesion Policy) The 2021-2027 programming period implements several thematic programs, 7 not counting the tech- nical assistance program, providing the framework for the implementation of funds under the part- nership agreement. i) Education & Employment Program The Education and Employment Program aims to unlock human potential at the national level by improving the relevance of education, promoting digital literacy and creating a resilient labor mar- ket. It allocates its budget to various priorities, including the modernization of labor market institu- tions, youth employment, access to employment, entrepreneurship, early childhood education, drop- out prevention and support for disadvantaged groups, improving the quality of education, improving vocational training and lifelong learning. The Ministry of Investment and European Projects is the Managing Authority (MA). The resources assigned to the 10 priorities contribute, in particular, to the objective Improve Mountain residents’ access to quality healthcare, educatio n, and other social ser- vices in towns and rural areas (Obj. 1) of the Strategy. 61 ii) Transport Program The overall objective of the Transport Operational Program is to implement investments that respond to Romania's development needs in order to sustainably reduce the development gaps in transport infrastructure. The program will also take into account the challenges posed by the COVID-19 pan- demic. Specific objectives include the development of a sustainable, resilient and intermodal TEN-T network and the improvement of national, regional and local mobility. The Managing Authority for this national program is the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure. Moreover, it includes eight pri- orities which show synergies to the strategies objectives Enable Mountain resi dents’ mobility within and beyond the Mountain Area Strategy, strategic objective 5 and to a smaller extent Assure the integrity and health of Mountain protected forests, grasslands, and other ecosystems, and strictly protected old-growth and primary forests (Strategic Obj.11). iii) Sustainable Development The program supports the transition to a resource-efficient, competitive economy, underpinned by Romania's National Sustainable Development Strategy 2030 and in line with the UN's 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The program aims to improve living standards, environmental quality, en- ergy efficiency and infrastructure. The Managing Authority is the Ministry of Investments and Euro- pean Projects. The budget is divided into four priorities: water and sanitation infrastructure and circular economy, environmental protection and adaptation to climate change, and energy efficiency and emission reduction. These priorities provide synergies for achieving the Mountain Area Strategy, strategic -objectives 2 (Improve building quality and access to basic utilities in Mountain towns and towns and rural parts of the Mountain Area), 10 (Support SMEs, entrepreneurship, and the develop- ment of smart specialization industries across sectors), 11 (Assure the integrity and health of Moun- tain protected forests, grasslands, and other ecosystems, and strictly protected old-growth and pri- mary forests), 13 (Enhance the social-ecological resilience of the Mountain Area in the face of cli- mate and other risks) and 15 (Foster more supportive service on the part of public-facing government entities operating in the Mountain Area). iv) Health The program aims to promote a nation of healthy and productive citizens through equitable access to quality health services. It finances investments in both pre-hospital and hospital care and in the resilience of the health system. Specifically, it focuses on areas such as cancer diagnosis and treat- ment, transplantation, communicable disease control (including healthcare-associated infections), the national blood transfusion system, and more. The managing authority for this program is again the Ministry of Investments and European Projects, which carries out the task through its specialized structure. The seven priorities of the program show synergies to the implementation of the objectives 1 (Improve Mountain residents’ access to quality healthcare, education, and other social services in towns and rural areas),6 (Enable more Mountain Area residents to benefit from internet access, 10 (Support SMEs, entrepreneurship, and the development of smart specialization industries across sectors) and 15 (Foster more supportive service on the part of public-facing government entities operating in the Mountain Area). v) Social Inclusion The Social Inclusion Funding Program aims to reduce poverty and promote social inclusion at national level in line with the principles of the European Pillar of Social Rights. In particular, it includes improving the efficiency of the labor market, facilitating access to quality jobs, increasing access to quality education, promoting the socio-economic integration of marginalized communities and mi- grants, ensuring gender equality in the labor market, promoting active inclusion and supporting the most disadvantaged. The Ministry of Investments and European Projects is the Managing Authority for this fund. In total 11 priorities of the program show synergies for reaching the objectives of the mountain strategy. More precisely, it can support the fulfilment of the Mountain Area Strategy, stra- tegic objectives 1 (Improve Mountain residents’ access to quality healthcare, education, and other 62 social services in towns and rural areas), 2 (Improve building quality and access to basic utilities in Mountain towns and rural parts of the Mountain Area),3 (Revitalize civic and cultural life in Moun- tain towns and Mountain rural areas life) and 14 (Increase the representation of Mountain stake- holders in relevant policymaking). vi) Just Transition The Just Transition Fund (JTF) aims to support the territories most affected by the transition to climate neutrality and to prevent the deepening of regional disparities. The strategic vision of the JTF is to support the economic diversification of the most affected territories, along with measures for retraining and active inclusion of workers and job seekers. It also aims to transform industrial processes for a transition to a climate-neutral economy. In Romania, the counties of Dolj, Galați, Gorj, Hunedoara, Mureș and Prahova are eligible for JTF fun ding. In this case, the 7 priorities help to foster the Mountain Area Strategy, strategic objectives 1 (Improve Mountain residents’ access to quality healthcare, education, and other social services in towns and rural areas), 2 (Improve build- ing quality and access to basic utilities in Mountain towns and rural parts of the Mountain Area), 5 (Enable Mountain residents’ mobility within and beyond the Mountain Area) and 10 (Support SMEs, entrepreneurship, and the development of smart specialization industries across sectors). vii) Smart Growth The program emphasizes private investment in research, development and innovation (RDI) and smart specialization (SI), strengthening public-private partnerships and reducing RDI fragmentation. It aims to build a resilient entrepreneurial ecosystem, in particular through a dedicated HUB and the digital transformation of SMEs. In terms of digitization, the focus is on refining public services, adopting a big and open data approach, and ensuring IT interoperability. The managing authority for this national program is the Ministry of Investment and European Projects. The priorities 1-3 of the Smart Growth program are expected to contribute to the achievement of the objectives of the mountain strategy. In particular, Support SMEs, entrepreneurship, and the development of smart specialization industries across sectors (Objective 10) and Foster more supportive service on the part of public-facing govern- ment entities operating in the Mountain Area (Objective 15). viii) Technical Assistance The Technical Assistance Program is intended for the coordination and control system of funds and the management of national programs implemented by the Ministry of Investments and European Projects. This program includes national programs that do not have a priority for technical assistance, such as the Health Program, the Sustainable Development Program, the Smart Growth, Digitalization and Financial Instruments Program, as well as the Technical Assistance Program itself. The aim of the program is to support the efficient and effective implementation of all European funds throughout Romania. Through its specialized structure, the Managing Authority for the Technical Assistance Pro- gram is the Ministry of Investments and European Projects. The technical assistance could contribute to the achievement of the objectives of the Strategy to strengthen the administrative capacity of the relevant stakeholders for Mountain Area policy implementation EU – regional level programs (Terri- torial Programs-Cohesion Policy). In addition to national level programs, 8 macro regional level operational programs are implemented in the 2021-2027 period. While developed to the specific needs of the region, the overall potential contributions to the Mountain Strategy are similar in nature across all regional programs. i) Operational Program West Region The vision of the Regional Program West (POR W) 2021-2027 is to have a region that is competitive at the European level, with a high level of research and development, innovation, and digitalization. It aims to be capable of attracting and capitalizing on investments, both internally and internation- ally, and to provide its citizens with efficient public services in communities with a high quality of life. The eligible area for the POR W covers the following counties within the West Development 63 Region of Romania: Arad, Caraș-Severin, Hunedoara, and Timiș. Thus, the fund shows potential syn- ergies to the Mountain Area Strategy, strategic objectives 2 (Improve building quality and access to basic utilities in Mountain towns and rural Mountain areas), 3 (Revitalize civic and cultural life in Mountain towns and Mountain rural areas), 5 (Enable Mountain residents’ mobility within and be- yond the Mountain Area), 9 (Increase the economic weight Mountain tourism ), 10 (Support SMEs, entrepreneurship, and the development of smart specialization industries across sectors), 11 (Assure the integrity and health of Mountain protected forests, grasslands, and other ecosystems, and strictly protected old-growth and primary forests), 12 (Improve the soil and water quality and mit- igate climate change (mitigate and prevent environmental and climate pollution)) and 15 (Foster more supportive service on the part of public-facing government entities operating in the Mountain Area). ii) Operational Program South-Muntenia Region The overall objective of the South-Muntenia Regional Program (POR S) 2021-2027 is to stimulate smart, sustainable, and balanced economic growth. This will lead to an improvement in the quality of life in local communities by supporting the innovation and digitalization capacity of local admin- istration and the regional economy, sustainable development of infrastructure and services, as well as by harnessing the cultural and tourism potential of the region. The geographic area includes the counties of Argeș, Călărași, Dâmbovița, Giurgiu, Ialomița, Pra hova, and Teleorman. The South-Mun- tenia Regional Development Agency serves as the Managing Authority for POR S. The fund shows potential synergies to the Mountain Area Strategy, strategic objectives 2 (Improve building quality and access to basic utilities in Mountain towns and rural Mountain areas), 3 (Revitalize civic and cultural life in Mountain towns and rural parts of the Mountain Area), 5 (Enable Mountain residents’ mobility within and beyond the Mountain Area), 9 (Increase the economic weight Mountain tourism), 10 (Support SMEs, entrepreneurship, and the development of smart specialization industries across sectors), 11 (Assure the integrity and health of Mountain protected forests, grasslands, and other ecosystems, and strictly protected old-growth and primary forests), 12 (Improve the soil and water quality and mitigate climate change (mitigate and prevent environmental and climate pollution)) and 15 (Foster more supportive service on the part of public-facing government entities operating in the Mountain Area) through the resources in the priority 1-7 area. iii) Operational Program South-West Oltenia Region The South-West Oltenia Regional Program (POR SW) 2021-2027 covers various areas such as innova- tion/research, technology transfer, boosting the competitiveness of SMEs, digitalization for the ben- efit of citizens, energy efficiency, urban development, mobility and accessibility, green infrastruc- ture and biodiversity, educational infrastructure, tourism, cultural heritage, and integrated territo- rial development. The South-West Oltenia region comprises 5 counties: Dolj, Gorj, Mehedinți, Olt, and Vâlcea. The South-West Oltenia Regional Development Agency is the managing authority for the POR SW. Within the program, resources are allocated to 8 priorities, which in turn fund potential synergies to the Mountain Strategic objectives 2 (Improve building quality and access to basic utili- ties in Mountain towns and rural Mountain areas), 3 (Revitalize civic and cultural life in Mountain towns and rural parts of the Mountain Area), 5 (Enable Mountain residents’ mobility within and beyond the Mountain Area), 9 (Increase the economic weight Mountain tourism), 10 (Support SMEs, entrepreneurship, and the development of smart specialization industries across sectors), 11 (Assure the integrity and health of Mountain protected forests, grasslands, and other ecosystems, and strictly protected old-growth and primary forests), 12 (Improve the soil and water quality and mit- igate climate change (mitigate and prevent environmental and climate pollution)) and 15 (Foster more supportive service on the part of public-facing government entities operating in the Mountain Area). 64 iv) Operational Program North-West Region The North-West Regional Program (POR NW) 2021-2027 proposes interventions in six counties of the North-West Development Region for the development of research, innovation, and digitalization ca- pacity, improving the energy performance of existing public and residential buildings, valorizing de- graded spaces in urban areas, promoting sustainable urban mobility, investing in the county road network and educational infrastructure, as well as actions to harness the cultural and tourist poten- tial. The eligible area includes the counties of Bihor, Bistrița -Năsăud, Cluj, Maramureș, Satu Mare and Sălaj. The North-West Regional Development Agency serves as the managing authority for POR NW. There are eight priorities in the program, with synergies expected to the Mountain Area Strat- egy, strategic objectives 2 (Improve building quality and access to basic utilities in Mountain towns and rural Mountain areas), 3 (Revitalize civic and cultural life in Mountain towns and rural parts of the Mountain Area), 5 (Enable Mountain residents’ mobility within and beyond the Mountain Area), 9 (Increase the economic weight Mountain tourism ), 10 (Support SMEs, entrepreneurship, and the development of smart specialization industries across sectors), 11 (Assure the integrity and health of Mountain protected forests, grasslands, and other ecosystems, and strictly protected old-growth and primary forests), 12 (Improve the soil and water quality and mitigate climate change (mitigate and prevent environmental and climate pollution)) and 15 (Foster more supportive service on the part of public-facing government entities operating in the Mountain Area). v) Operational Program North-East Region The overall objective of PR North-East (POR NE) 2021-2027 is to stimulate balanced development based on a process of smart, sustainable, and inclusive economic growth that leads to an improve- ment in the quality of life and the reduction of intra and interregional development disparities The North-East Region comprises the counties of Bacău, Botoșani, Iași, Neamț, Suceava, and Vaslui, being the largest region in Romania in terms of both area and population. The Regional Development Agency of the North-East Region serves as the managing authority for the POR NE. The fund shows potential synergies to the Mountain Area Strategy, strategic objectives 2 (Improve building quality and access to basic utilities in Mountain towns and rural Mountain areas), 3 (Revitalize civic and cultural life in Mountain towns and rural parts of the Mountain Area), 5 (Enable Mountain residents’ mobility within and beyond the Mountain Area), 9 (Increase the economic weight Mountain tourism ), 10 (Support SMEs, entrepreneurship, and the development of smart specialization industries across sectors), 11 (Assure the integrity and health of Mountain protected forests, grasslands, and other ecosystems, and strictly protected old-growth and primary forests), 12 (Improve the soil and water quality and mitigate climate change (mitigate and prevent environmental and climate pollution)) and 15 (Foster more supportive service on the part of public-facing government entities operating in the Mountain Area) through the resources in the priority 1-7 area. vi) Operational Program South-East Region The general objective of the Regional Program South-East (POR SE) 2021-2027 is to increase regional economic competitiveness and improve the living conditions of local communities by supporting the development of the business environment, infrastructure, and services. This is aimed at reducing intra-regional disparities and promoting sustainable development through efficient resource manage- ment, harnessing demographic and innovation potential, and assimilating technological progress. The South-East Region comprises 6 counties (Brăila, Buzău, Constanța, Galați, Tulcea, Vrancea) with a total area of 35,762 km2 (the second-largest in Romania, representing 15% of the total national area). The Regional Development Agency of the South-East Region serves as the managing authority for the POR SE. The fund from priorities 1-7 also shows potential synergies to the Mountain Area Strategy, strategic objectives 2 (Improve building quality and access to basic utilities in Mountain towns and rural Mountain areas), 3 (Revitalize civic and cultural life in Mountain towns and Mountain rural areas), 5 (Enable Mountain residents’ mobility within and beyond the Mountain Area), 9 (Increase the economic weight Mountain tourism ), 10 (Support SMEs, entrepreneurship, and the development of smart specialization industries across sectors), 11 (Assure the integrity and health of Mountain 65 protected forests, grasslands, and other ecosystems, and strictly protected old-growth and primary forests), 12 (Improve the soil and water quality and mitigate climate change (mitigate and prevent environmental and climate pollution)), 13 (Enhance the social-ecological resilience of the Mountain Area in the face of climate and other risks) and 15 (Foster more supportive service on the part of public-facing government entities operating in the Mountain Area). vii) Operational Program Central Region The Central Regional Program 2021-2027 will finance interventions aimed at transforming the region into a competitive one through innovation and dynamic enterprises for a smart, digital economy with environmentally friendly communities, sustainable and accessible urban mobility, education, sustain- able and attractive tourism. Eligible areas are the counties of Alba, Brașov, Covasna, Harghita, Mureș, and Sibiu. For this program, the Regional Development Agency of the Central Region fulfills the role of the managing authority. The fund shows potential synergies to the Mountain Area Strategy, stra- tegic objectives 2 (Improve building quality and access to basic utilities in Mountain towns and rural Mountain areas), 3 (Revitalize civic and cultural life in Mountain towns and rural parts of the Moun- tain Area), 5 (Enable Mountain residents’ mobility within and beyond the Mountain Area), 9 (Increase the economic weight Mountain tourism ), 10 (Support SMEs, entrepreneurship, and the development of smart specialization industries across sectors), 11 (Assure the integrity and health of Mountain protected forests, grasslands, and other ecosystems, and strictly protected old-growth and primary forests), 12 (Improve the soil and water quality and mitigate climate change (mitigate and prevent environmental and climate pollution)) and 15 (Foster more supportive service on the part of public- facing government entities operating in the Mountain Area) through the resources in the priority 1- 9 area. 4.3.3 PNS 2023-2027 The objectives of the CAP in Romania are to create an environment for profitable food production, to contribute to food security through agriculture, to ensure sustainable management of natural re- sources and climate change mitigation, and finally to maintain the spatial balance and diversity of rural areas. The MARD is the Managing Authority responsible for the implementation of the PNS. Although the PNS does not specifically target mountain areas, it includes provisions and measures that may be relevant to Mountain Areas. From the broad number of PNS interventions, particular synergies with the Strategy’s are, with ob- jectives 4 (Economically support and protect “at-risk” rural Mountain communities), 5 (Enable Moun- tain residents’ mobility within and beyond the Mountain Area), 7 (Enable profitable and competitive Mountain agrifood value chains), 8 (Strengthening economic opportunities in the Mountain forest bioeconomy (and the nonfood bioeconomy at large)), 10 (Support SMEs, entrepreneurship, and the development of smart specialization industries across sectors), 11 (Assure the integrity and health of Mountain protected forests, grasslands, and other ecosystems, and strictly protected old-growth and primary forests) and 12 (Improve the soil and water quality and mitigate climate change (miti- gate and prevent environmental and climate pollution) of the Mountain Area Strategy are supported in particular. A key issue linked to the PNS funding and objectives of the Strategy however is the fact, that smallest scale farmers (below 1 ha farm size) are not eligible for some of the payments. In addition, although for a range a programs some specific criteria for Mountain Area farmers have been included, improve- ments are needed in the ranking systems for applications, which in multiple cases, benefit larger scale farmers, thus providing a limitation from the outset to Mountain Area farmers. Furthermore, support systems and capacity are needed to help Mountain Area farmers access these programs, in- cluding facilitating access to commercial financing. 66 4.3.4 NRRP/PRRN The Romania Recovery and Resilient Plan (NRRP/PNRR) aims to help mitigate the immediate damage to the economy and society caused by the corona virus. It also aims to make the Romanian economy and society greener, more digital and more resilient in the aftermath of the corona virus, and better prepared for the challenges and opportunities of environmental and digital change. The PNRR con- tains a large amount of potential funding opportunities covering both grants and loans. Nevertheless, the structure of the fund leads to considerable difficulties for mountain regions in accessing re- sources. Overall the RRF shows synergies to a large number of themes covered by the Strategy, in particular objectives 1 (Improve Mountain residents’ access to quality healthcare, education, and other social services in towns and rural areas), 3 (Revitalize civic and cultural life in Mountain towns and Mountain rural areas), 5 (Enable Mountain residents’ mobility within and beyond the Mountain Area), 6 (Enable more Mountain Area residents to benefit from internet access), 8 (Strengthening economic opportunities in the Mountain forest bioeconomy (and the nonfood bioeconomy at large)), 9 (Increase the economic weight Mountain tourism), 10 (Support SMEs, entrepreneurship, and the development of smart specialization industries across sectors), 11 (Assure the integrity and health of Mountain protected forests, grasslands, and other ecosystems, and strictly protected old-growth and primary forests), 13 (Enhance the social-ecological resilience of the Mountain Area in the face of climate and other risks), 15 (Foster more supportive service on the part of public-facing government entities operating in the Mountain Area). 4.3.5 National sources i) National Investment Program Anghel Saligny 2021-2028 This program is coordinated by the Ministry of Development, Public Works, and Administration (MLPDA) and beneficiaries include public authorities. As part of this program, it is possible to finance the construction, rehabilitation, consolidation, modernization or extension of infrastructure from the following areas: water provision and water treatment plants, sewage and wastewater treatment sys- tems, including for rainwater drainage, public roads, bridges, including pedestrian walkways and bicycle crossings, gas distribution infrastructure. This program is relevant for the Mountain Area Strategy, strategic objectives 2 and 5 of the Mountain Strategy. ii) National Program “Safe and healthy schools” (February 2023 – February 2027) The program, also coordinated by the Ministry of Development, Public Works and Administration, aims to fund interventions for the seismic consolidation, rehabilitation, modernization, and the in- creasing of energy performance of buildings with a pre-university educational function, including of those dedicated to special education. This program is relevant for the Mountain Area Strategy, stra- tegic objective 2, and in particular Measures 2.3 and 2.4. iii) The National Construction Program of Public or Social Interest ( January 2023 – December 2027) This program is administered by the National Investment Company and eligible activities comprise the building, rehabilitation, modernization, equipping and extension of the following types of build- ings: sport halls and arenas, swimming pools, buildings with a cultural destination (houses of cultures, folk schools, traditional arts and crafts schools, cultural centers), education facilities (including for research, cafeterias, dormitories and cultural and sports-related annexes), ice-skating rinks, health centers (hospitals, buildings hosting multiple doctors’ offices), cinema halls, roads of local or county interest, wastewater treatment and water provision systems (including septic tanks, micro installa- tions for water purification, sewage and public water distribution infrastructure). In addition, it also makes allocations to emergency investments and works required to precent or mitigate calamities due to accidents or natural hazards, including earthquakes, landslides, fires, technical accidents. There is also a subprogram for the rehabilitation of blocks of flats in disadvantaged localities, based exclusively on a previous national program – see guide for details –as well as an allocation for any 67 other objectives in the construction sector which are not already covered by other existing programs. This program is relevant for Mountain Area Strategy, strategic objectives 1, 2, 3, 5 and 13. iv) Others The above-mentioned national programs include funding sources for which local authorities can act as beneficiaries. In addition, there exist other thematic programs that can support various activities of individual citizens or of economic operators. These programs are not listed here as most of them are short-term, with limited application periods and, as such, they cannot be leveraged as funding sources for implementing the Mountain Strategy at scale. However, local authorities’ advisory ser- vices should maintain an updated list of such funding calls and inform Mountain Area residents of relevant opportunities. 68 5 Measures regarding the implementation, monitoring and evaluation of the Strategy Methodological approach of the ex-ante assessment: For monitoring, the ex-ante assessment re- viewed the available indicators from funding programs, SDGs and the territorial observatory on the respective link to the measures and objectives implemented through the strategy. In particular out- put- and result indicators produced for European funds were taken into consideration due to their clear link to the strategy and the already established monitoring systems. Furthermore, all indica- tors identified fulfil the SMART criteria and do not require additional assessment and definitions different from the ones defined by the programs. The recommended monitoring arrangements have furthermore been outlined based on the institu- tional framework of the Mountain Area and the evaluation experiences developed in further strat- egies and programs. Contribution to the strategy development: the ex-ante assessment conducted the full review for funding sources as well as for indicators in consultation with the strategy drafting team and provided the corresponding sections to the strategy. Uptake of the recommendation and remaining recommendation: The information provided by the ex-ante assessment was fully taken up by the strategy. 5.1 Proposed indicator framework The following section corresponds to section 6.2 of the draft Strategy and was developed by the ex- ante team. 5.2 Indicators The indicator system for monitoring the Proposed Strategy has been developed to allow for a judge- ment on the objective level. The indicators are indicative and have to be integrated into a final monitoring and evaluation plan in line with the requirements of the implementing authority. They have been developed considering the main outcomes of the Proposed Strategy, however creating a reasonable effort in monitoring without the need for extensive additional data collection. The indi- cator system is largely based on sets of indicators that are already being collected through Romania’s obligations vis-à-vis the EU Cohesion funds, the Common Agricultural Policy and the Recovery and Resilience Facility as well as indicators available from official sources. Due to the strong alignment with the existing strategic and legal framework, the additional effort required for monitoring progress of the strategy can thus be minimized. Nevertheless, even for ex- isting indicators it can be necessary to adapt the collection to the specific requirements of the moun- tain strategy, i.e. evaluating progress for the Mountain Area and not for the country as a whole. Furthermore, several indicators require the expansion of the existing data collection beyond the individual programs that currently monitor them. In addition to the existing frameworks, several more innovative and mountain specific measures re- quire the collection of additional indicators not yet covered by existing monitoring systems in place. These indicators consider mainly outputs or build on readily available information sources, thus it is possible to collect and apply them in monitoring and evaluation without creating overbearing admin- istrative effort. For monitoring the overall progress of the Proposed Strategy, a set of key indicators for each pillar has been defined, building on the more detailed, output-oriented indicator framework on specific objective level. These are presented in Table 2. Specific Objectives, Expected Outcomes and Key Indicators. 69 Table 2. Specific Objectives, Expected Outcomes and Key Indicators SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES EXPECTED OUTCOMES KEY INDICATORS Pillar I: Thriving multigenerational communities Strategic Objective I: Enhance the attractiveness and inclusiveness of small Mountain towns and rural areas to multigenerational Mountain communities (1) Improve Mountain residents’ access to ▪ Increased access to quality social Percentage of moun- quality healthcare, education, and other services tain population with social services in Mountain hub towns and ▪ Improved living conditions: access access to healthcare 5 rural areas to basic utilities and selected build- and basic utilities (2) Improve building quality and access to ing upgrades Percentage of young basic utilities in Mountain towns and rural ▪ Increased community involvement in mountain population parts of the Mountain Area setting up bottom-up initiatives, so- with access to daycare (3) Revitalize civic and cultural life in small cial innovations and cultural events and quality education Mountain towns and rural areas facilities6 ▪ Economic protection of “at risk” (4) Economically support and protect “at- Mountain communities Percentage of vulnera- risk” rural Mountain communities ble and remotely lo- cated population ben- efiting from economic programs/incentives7 Pillar II: Connected mountain living Strategic Objective II: Enhance Mountain Area residents’ connectivity in towns and rural areas (5) Enable Mountain residents’ mobility ▪ Improved and greener transporta- Percentage of moun- within and beyond the Mountain Area tion services and infrastructure tain municipalities ser- (6) Enable more Mountain Area residents to ▪ Increased access to high-quality in- viced by appropriate benefit from internet access ternet and digital services public transport8 Percentage of moun- tain population with access to broadband internet Pillar III: Green and competitive place-based economy Strategic Objective III: Stimulate the Mountain Area's economic opportunities, while capitalizing on its regional strengths (7) Enable profitable and competitive Moun- ▪ Increased valorization of Mountain Average farm income tain agrifood value chains agrifood bioeconomy in mountain areas9 (8) Strengthening economic opportunities in ▪ Improved economic perspectives in GVA created by for- the Mountain forest bioeconomy (and the the forest bioeconomy estry in mountain ar- nonfood bioeconomy at large) eas10 _ 5 Municipality-based assessment building on monitoring of the strategy outputs, the corresponding programs and the popula- tion data 6 Municipality-based assessment building on monitoring of the strategy outputs, the corresponding programs and the popula- tion data 7 Municipality-based assessment building on monitoring of the strategy outputs, the corresponding programs and the popula- tion data 8 Individual evaluation based on public transport availability and distances to stations. If appropriate, service levels can be taken into account as well 9 To be determined from FADN database or monitoring system for the CAP 10 Based on Eurostat GVA indicators 70 SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES EXPECTED OUTCOMES KEY INDICATORS (9) Increase the economic weight of Mountain ▪ Increased economic relevance of GVA created by tour- tourism sustainable tourism in rural areas ism in mountain ar- (10) Support SMEs, entrepreneurship, and the and small-towns eas11 development of smart specialization in- ▪ Increased number of financially via- dustries across sectors ble SMEs and entrepreneurs across a range of sectors Pillar IV: Respect for nature Strategic Objective IV: Protect, restore, and nurture the integrity, health, and resilience of Mountain ecosys- tems and biodiversity (11) Assure the integrity and health of Moun- ▪ Healthy and integral protected for- Share of the area un- tain protected forests, grasslands, and ests, grasslands and other ecosys- der protection re- other ecosystems tems gimes12 (12) Improve soil and water quality and miti- ▪ Improved soil and water quality, as Average soil quality13 gate climate change (mitigate and pre- well as mitigation of climate change Share of municipalities vent environmental and climate pollution) ▪ Increased social-ecological resili- with up-to-date cli- (13) Enhance the social-ecological resilience of ence vis-à-vis climate-related risks mate change adaption the Mountain Area in the face of climate and other natural hazards and disaster emer- and other risks gency plans14 Pillar V: Mountain empowerment Strategic Objective V: Empower the Mountain Area to determine and pursue its own aspirations (14) Increase the representation of Mountain ▪ Increased representation of Moun- Satisfaction rate with stakeholders in relevant policymaking tain stakeholders in policymaking public facing govern- (15) Foster more supportive service on the ▪ A supportive, service-oriented cul- ment entities15 part of public-facing government entities ture in public-facing government in- operating in the Mountain Area stitutions and local authorities The list of operational outcomes and indicators at the measured level are detailed below. Table 3. Operational outcomes and indicators SPECIFIC EXPECTED MEASURES MEASURE OUTCOMES OBJECTIVES OUTCOME (Objective level) PILLAR I: THRIVING MULTIGENERATIONAL COMMUNITIES Strategic Objective I: Enhance the attractiveness and inclusiveness of small Mountain towns and rural areas to multigenera- tional Mountain communities Result: An attractive and inclusive living environment Outcome: Improved quality of life in Mountain Area communities Objective 1: Im- Increased ac- 1.1 Developing community health and social Residents’ closer-to-home access to basic prove Mountain cess to quality assistance centers in Mountain hub towns medical and social assistance services residents’ access social services 1.2 Establishing telehealth, mobile health, Access to first-line healthcare and elderly to quality and elder care in remote parts of the Moun- care in residents’ own localities tain Area _ 11 Based on Eurostat GVA indicators 12 GIS based assessment 13 Building e.g. on the land suitability assessment methodology 14 GIS based assessment 15 To be developed based on a targeted survey in the region, taking into consideration in particular regional- and local level government entities. 71 SPECIFIC EXPECTED MEASURES MEASURE OUTCOMES OBJECTIVES OUTCOME (Objective level) healthcare, edu- 1.3 Developing daycare, kindergarten, after- Access for working families to child care facil- cation, and school programming, and innovative school- ities near their homes other social ser- ing models in Mountain rural areas Children from vulnerable and remote commu- vices in towns nities are able to attend school and rural areas 1.4 Developing integrated programs for at- Increased interest of young and established tracting and retaining essential workers and workers and professionals from essential sec- professionals to/in Mountain rural areas tors are to take up traineeships and jobs in the Mountain Area Increased opportunities for residents to con- tinue learning and develop their skills Objective 2: Im- Improved liv- 2.1. Supporting the installation of off-grid Access to off-grid electricity generation, heat- prove building ing conditions: technologies in remote parts of the Mountain ing, water and sanitation systems for resi- quality and ac- access to basic Area dents in remote areas cess to basic utilities and 2.2 Expanding and upgrading utility connec- Access to collective facilities and utilities for utilities in small selected build- tions in more densely populated Mountain ar- the provision of electricity, heating, water, Mountain towns ing upgrades eas sewage and waste disposal for residents in and rural parts more densely populated areas. of the Mountain Area. 2.3 Improving housing quality in risk-prone Reduced housing susceptibility to Mountain- areas and vulnerable Mountain communities specific disasters in risk-prone areas and vul- nerable communities 2.4 Subsidizing critically-needed improve- Adequate heating systems supporting year- ments to public buildings round operations in schools, healthcare facili- ties and other public buildings Overall improved conditions in public build- ings Objective 3: Re- Increased com- 3.1 Supporting and amplifying “smart vil- Enhanced ability of residents with civic initia- vitalize civic and munity in- lage” and other community-driven social in- tives to implement their ideas cultural life in volvement in novation initiatives Replication of existing successful rural devel- Mountain towns setting up bot- opment initiatives of large NGOs into the and Mountain ru- tom-up initia- Mountain Area ral areas tives, social in- novations and 3.2 Supporting youth-oriented community in- Access to financial and technical support for cultural events itiatives and youth programming youth interested in leading civic initiatives 3.3 Supporting cultural activities relating to Increased offering of cultural events, pro- Mountain traditions and heritage, as well as grams and activities to engage in diversity and innovation Preserved local practical knowledge Objective 4: Economic pro- 4.1 Developing an economic inclusion pro- Reduced economic burden of living in remote Economically tection of “at gram for qualifying residents of “at risk” and “at-risk” communities for the respective support and pro- risk” Mountain Mountain communities residents tect “at-risk” ru- communities 4.2 Helping subsistence farmers and rural Increased diversification of economic activi- ral Mountain households diversify their incomes ties in subsistence rural households communities PILLAR II: CONNECTED MOUNTAIN LIVING Strategic Objective II: Enhance Mountain Area residents’ connectivity in towns and rural areas Result: Enhanced mobility and access to digital networks and services Outcome: Mountain communities served with better mobility options and quality digital ser- vices Objective 5: En- Improved and 5.1 Developing mobility services with a focus Improved mobility services connecting rural able Mountain greener trans- on facilitating Mountain rural residents’ ac- areas to hub towns and urban centers, includ- residents’ mobil- portation ser- cess to hub towns and urban centers ing dedicated school transport for children ity within and vices and in- 5.2 Repairing and developing targeted green Greener mobility infrastructure, regularly beyond the frastructure mobility infrastructure maintained Mountain Area Objective 6: En- Increased ac- 6.1 Expanding internet infrastructure in Expanded internet infrastructure able more Moun- cess to high- small towns and rural areas tain Area resi- quality inter- 6.2 Endowing communities with equipment Improved resident access to equipment (ki- dents to benefit net and digital for internet access osks, personal computing equipment) for us- from internet services ing digital services access 6.3 Develop Mountain Area’s residents digital Increased residents’ skills and availability of competences support for using relevant digital services 72 SPECIFIC EXPECTED MEASURES MEASURE OUTCOMES OBJECTIVES OUTCOME (Objective level) PILLAR III: GREEN AND COMPETITIVE PLACE-BASED ECONOMY Strategic Objective III: Stimulate the Mountain Area's economic opportunities, while capitalizing on its regional strengths Result: A functional, green and competitive place-based economy Outcome: Increased economic opportunities for Mountain Area residents Objective 7: En- Increased val- 7.1 Enhancing the provision of agrifood sup- Increased access to agrifood support services able profitable orization of port services through multistakeholder part- through active knowledge and innovation net- and competitive Mountain agri- nerships and Mountain-focused knowledge works Mountain agri- food bioecon- and innovation networks food value omy 7.2 Strengthening collective action for value Enhanced value chains via increased organiza- chains chain self-organization and competitiveness tion and collective action of agrifood produc- improvements ers 7.3 Enhancing food safety compliance and Improved food safety compliance, including the sustainable commercialization of high- for foraged foods value foraged foods 7.4 Expanding targeted support for quality Increased value-added through better quality differentiation and marketing of Mountain differentiation and marketing of Mountain agrifood products agrifood products 7.5 Expanding efforts around Mountain agri- Increased demand for Mountain agrifood prod- food product market development and pro- ucts through better promotion and market ac- motion cess 7.6 Enhancing the climate resilience of More climate resilient agrifood value chains Mountain agrifood value chains and agricultural practices 7.7 Integral support to Mountain farm succes- Easier business entry and increased viability sors and agro-entrepreneurs of farm successors and agro-entrepreneurs 7.8 Supporting the transfer of land to active Easier land transfer Mountain farmers 7.9 Provision of targeted technical support to Increased access of agrifood producers to Mountain agrifood producers to overcome ad- CAP/PNS and other public sector support ministrative and legal barriers to accessing CAP/PNS and other public sector support 7.10 Expanding mechanisms to facilitate Increased access to finance for agrifood pro- agrifood producers’ access to finance ducers Objective 8: Improved eco- 8.1 Supporting sustainable timber and non- Increased number of foresters and processors Strengthening nomic perspec- timber value chain developments with a fo- benefitting from improved technology, infra- economic oppor- tives in the cus on enhanced technology adoption/infra- structure and training tunities in the forest bioecon- structure and training/skills Mountain forest omy 8.2 Strengthened quality assurance, product Improved traceability systems and product bioeconomy (and differentiation and market transparency in differentiation through ecolabels the nonfood bio- timber and non-timber forest products economy at large) 8.3 Support for Mountain bioeconomy re- Improved understanding of innovation oppor- search and development tunities in the Mountain bioeconomy 8.4 Stimulating demand for Mountain bioe- New markets and/or increased demand for conomy products and services Mountain bioeconomy products and services Objective 9: In- Increased eco- 9.1 Strengthening actors and efforts relating Integrated promotion of Mountain tourism crease the eco- nomic rele- to the promotion of Mountain tourism destinations nomic weight of vance of sus- 9.2 Enhancing the quality and modernization Improved touristic facilities and services Mountain tour- tainable tour- of tourism facilities and services in Mountain ism ism in rural ar- hubs eas and small- towns 9.3 Investing in shared tourism infrastructure New tourism infrastructure, strategically se- based on strategic planning lected 9.4 Supporting the involvement of rural and Ease of access to market and increased viabil- small town SMEs in the Mountain tourism ity of new SMEs economy, with a focus on urban-rural link- ages (aligned to SMEs section below). 9.5 Sustainable planning, developing, and Coordinated tourist flows through route and managing tourist flows to small Mountain service management towns and rural areas 73 SPECIFIC EXPECTED MEASURES MEASURE OUTCOMES OBJECTIVES OUTCOME (Objective level) 9.6 Anticipating and mitigating climate Mitigation of unwanted social and environ- threats and unwanted social and environ- mental tourism impacts mental impacts of tourism on small Mountain towns and rural areas Objective 10: Increased 10.1 Strengthening business development Enhanced and supported business innovation Support SMEs, number of fi- and acceleration services for Mountain SMEs, and entrepreneurship environment entrepreneur- nancially via- entrepreneurs, and businesses in smart spe- ship, and the de- ble SMEs and cialization sectors (including agrifood, for- velopment of entrepreneurs estry, and tourism) smart specializa- across a range 10.2 Facilitating industry-level innovation Improved business environment and new initi- tion industries of sectors aligned with smart specialization and im- atives around regional/local smart specializa- across sectors prove the business enabling environment. tion 10.3 Establish financing schemes and instru- Improved access to (co-)finance for SMEs and ments targeting Mountain SMEs and busi- other smart specialization businesses nesses in smart specialization sectors (in- cluding agrifood, forestry, and tourism) 10.4 Develop market-aligned vocational and Increased availability of skilled labor force in professional training programs involving eco- line with industry needs nomic operators, and attracting in-demand technical and professional skills PILLAR IV: RESPECT FOR NATURE Strategic Objective IV: Protect, restore, and nurture the integrity, health, and resilience of Mountain ecosystems and biodiver- sity Result: Protected, restored and nurtured Mountain ecosystems Outcome: Maintained biodiversity and ecosys- tem integrity and enhanced climate resilience Objective 11: Healthy and 11.1 Improving forest use monitoring, zoning, Sustainable use of forest resources Assure the integ- integral pro- and timber tracking, in alignment with provi- rity and health tected forests, sions of the Forest Strategy 2030 of Mountain pro- grasslands and 11.2 Improving and implementing eco-com- Reduced conservation conflicts and law non- tected forests, other ecosys- pensation relating to biodiversity protections compliance grasslands, and tems with a focus on adequately compensating other ecosys- forest owners and expand the use of pay- tems, and ments for environmental services strictly pro- tected old- 11.3 Supporting sustainable energy biomass Alleviating energy poverty growth and pri- use to combat energy poverty mary forests. 11.4 Supporting Mountain Forest owners’ Increased adoption by forest owners of con- take-up of forest-conservation practices, servation practices, technologies and infra- technologies, and infrastructure structure 11.5 Encouraging the revitalization and cli- Increased interest in and revitalization of pas- mate-adaptation of high-altitude pastoralism toralism 11.6 Supporting social-ecological research on Increased knowledge about state-of-the-art effective ecosystem restoration and manage- ecosystem restoration practices ment approaches, notably for grasslands and forests 11.7 Restoring, rehabilitating, or rewilding Restored, rehabilitated and rewilded ecosys- degraded ecosystems tems 11.8 Ensuring the effective management of Improved effectiveness of protected area protected areas, including through civic and management community participation Objective 12: Improved soil 12.1 Investing in residential wastewater Reduced nutrient pollution from wastewater Improve soil and and water treatment with a focus on nutrient pollution water quality quality, as hotspots and mitigate cli- well as mitiga- 12.2 Reducing pollution and increasing car- Reduced nutrient pollution from agricultural mate change tion of climate bon sequestration in agriculture with a focus activities (mitigate and change on soil and manure management prevent environ- mental and cli- 12.3 Protecting and enhancing carbon sinks Increased tree and vegetation cover mate pollution) with a focus on enhancing tree and other vegetative cover 12.4 Mitigating greenhouse gas emissions Reduced greenhouse gas emissions through with a focus on residential heating and trans- improved household and transportation en- portation ergy efficiency 74 SPECIFIC EXPECTED MEASURES MEASURE OUTCOMES OBJECTIVES OUTCOME (Objective level) 12.5 Assessing and developing carbon finance Increased understanding of carbon finance op- opportunities across Mountain sectors portunities 12.6 Continuing to remediate and reconvert Remediation of contaminated sites contaminated sites Objective 13: Increased so- 13.1 Developing climate change adaptation Reduced susceptibility to climate change ef- Enhance the so- cial-ecological and disaster emergency plans at the local fects and increased preparedness for disaster cial-ecological resilience vis- and massif levels emergency resilience of the à-vis climate- 13.2 Developing disaster response capacity in Increased capacity for disaster response Mountain Area in related risks small Mountain towns and rural areas the face of cli- and other nat- mate and other ural hazards 13.3 Building environmental awareness Increased awareness and knowledge of envi- risks through school and professional training cur- ronmental and climate topics ricula and certification requirements PILLAR V: MOUNTAIN EMPOWERMENT Strategic Objective V: Empower the Mountain Area to determine and pursue its own aspirations Result: Empowered Mountain community in determining its future Outcome: Effective collaboration between lo- cal actors and authorities in multi-level gov- ernance processes Objective 14: Increased rep- 14.1 Strengthening the National Mountain Increased capacity and power of ANZM to im- Increase the resentation of Area Agency and its advisory bodies plement Mountain policies representation Mountain 14.2 Increasing Mountain authorities’ policy- Increased role of Mountain authorities in pol- of Mountain stakeholders in making roles and capacities icy-making across all relevant sectors stakeholders in policymaking relevant policy- 14.Enhancing mechanisms for stakeholder Increased stakeholder participation and influ- making consultation and participation in local plan- ence on policy-making ning and policy-making Objective 15: A supportive, 15.1 Developing a supportive and service-ori- More service-oriented local authorities Foster more sup- service-ori- ented culture in local government and pub- portive service ented culture lic-facing parts of government agencies on the part of in public-fac- 15.2 Piloting e-government and innovative More e-government solutions for Mountain public-facing ing govern- administrative service delivery models cater- residents (to avoid unnecessary travels) government en- ment institu- ing to rural and remote Mountain residents tities operating tions and local in the Mountain authorities 15.3 Establish specific mechanisms to help Improved stakeholder access and management Area Mountain stakeholders access available pub- capacity vis-a-vis public funding lic funding and technical resources and han- dle administrative requirements 5.3 Mechanisms for Monitoring the Proposed Strategy The following section corresponds to section 6.3 of the Draft Strategy and was developed by the ex- ante team. 5.3.1 Institutional responsibilities for Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) The overall monitoring and evaluation function of the Proposed Strategy falls under the responsibility of the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development. It is proposed that the National Mountain Area Agency acts as monitoring and evaluation unit (M&E unit) and consequently takes over the co- ordination of the monitoring of the implementation of the Proposed Strategy and the organization of the evaluation, with inputs of relevant Directorates within MARD, and the different Ministries and entities with roles in Proposed Strategy implementation. It is proposed that the evaluations them- selves are conducted by an independent external evaluation team that is contracted for the interim and the final evaluation by the M&E unit. The main tasks of the M&E unit are as following: • Monitoring the Mountain Strategy and collecting the relevant information; • Preparing the annual implementation report; 75 • Setting up a concrete evaluation plan, drafting the evaluation questions and tendering the in- terim evaluation and the final evaluation; • Accompanying and supporting the interim and the final evaluation conducted by an independent external evaluation team with data, information and contacts; • Organizing the link and feedback loops between the results of the evaluation with the relevant actors implementing the strategy. The main tasks of the independent external evaluation team are as following: • development of a methodological approach; • conducting the evaluation in close exchange with the M&E unit; • answering the evaluation questions; • drafting recommendations for the next steps of the implementation of the Mountain Strategy including an exchange with the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development. 5.3.2 Annual Implementation Reports The Annual Implementation Report (AIR) provides information on the annual progress concerning the implementation of the Proposed Strategy. It focuses on the following topics: (a) For each proposed measure and exemplary proposed action or initiative of the Proposed Strategy the status of its implementation is assessed. For each objective and for each listed measure the status of its implementation will be analyzed along a common implementation progress scale. This “implementation progress scale” could e.g., include the following stages of implementation: • The proposed action was further discussed to be implemented; • The requested changes/projects/funding options/etc. to implement the proposed action were in the pipeline (“What is their current status?”); • The proposed action was implemented (In how many regions/communities/projects); and • No relevant activity towards the implementation could be identified. Furthermore, it will be analyzed whether additional actions that were not described in the Mountain Strategy were set up in line with one of the objectives and measures of the Mountain Strategy. These actions could also be assessed along the defined “implementation progress scale”. Envisaged result This detailed assessment of the progress of the implementation allows to get a clear picture with respect to which objectives defined by the Mountain Strategy are on a pathway to being realized, and which are facing difficulties. (b) The defined indicators for monitoring the Proposed Strategy are collected. Based on the indicator system for monitoring the Proposed Strategy the relevant indicators are col- lected by the M&E unit, from inputs/contributions from Ministries and partner entities as well as the own data generated by MARD and ANZM. The developed indicator system includes output indicators as well as result indicators and context indicators to enable an assessment of the different aspects of the intervention logic of each objective of the Mountain Strategy. However, to assess the impact of the implementation of the Proposed Strategy on the ground, the development of the indicators has to be mirrored against the status of its implementation. 76 Envisaged result The collection of the indicators defined allows for the analysis of the extent to which the outcomes expected as a result of the Proposed Strategy are reflected in the development of the region. The AIR should be presented to relevant stakeholders, including the National Mountain Council and Massif Committees, and reflected upon in an interactive exchange format. 5.3.3 Setting up the Monitoring System Based on the required relevant information of the monitoring to draft the AIR, standards for the monitoring system have to be set up. Once developed, they contribute to a smooth and standardized provision of information for the AIR and the evaluations. The following tools will be developed in order to set up the monitoring system. It will include: • A standardized indicator collection procedure: Several proposed monitoring indicators are already collected by other organizations, others can be found in the Territorial Observatory and others need to be collected as primary data. The defined indicator collection procedure will include: • A clearly defined workflow to get those indicators that are already collected by other organ- izations based on agreements on data exchange; • A clear identification of the indicators collected through the Territorial Observatory; • A clear procedure of how to get those primary data that need to be collected by the M&E unit by itself; and • A clear methodology on how to disaggregate indicator values to infer the value corresponding to the Mountain Area, in those cases where data is only available at a higher level than ATU level (e.g. only county-level data is available). • A standardized procedure to assess the status of the stage of implementation of the Proposed Strategy. In order to collect the status of the implementation of each measure and each proposed action and to provide an overview along the objectives, a standardized procedure of information col- lection and assessment of the stage of implementation will be set up, with contributions of Min- istries and partner institutions with roles in the implementation of the Proposed Strategy. It will include the following aspects: • For each proposed measure one or a few key Partner implementing institutions will be iden- tified as mainly responsible for the implementation. They will be contacted periodically, depending of the indicator to be collected, but not less than once a year, for a very short report on the status of the implementation. This could be also done through a short interview, but mechanisms need to be discussed and agreed with relevant partners with responsibility in the Proposed Strategy implementation. The list of the main actors of a measures’ imple- mentation will be set up once and then used for the annual check-in; and • The proposed “implementation progress scale” will be further elaborated and tailored to the needs of the institutional setting. • A standardized structure of the AIR: Based on the tools of information collection developed a standardized structure of the AIR will be developed. It will include: • The structure of the chapters of the report; and • The structure of the data collection file (Excel-file) enabling the comparison of timelines in the future. 77 5.3.4 Interim and Final Evaluations The interim evaluations and the final evaluation aim at contributing to the further development of the Proposed Strategy and its implementation. In order to get additional external insights into its status, it is recommended to conduct the evaluations by an independent external evaluation team. The evaluation will follow the Strategic Planning Manual of the Government’s General Secretariat 16. Consequently, it will include all the relevant steps: 1. Identifying stakeholders: Who needs to receive evaluations and why? 2. Defining evaluation questions: What are the questions that the evaluation needs to answer? 3. Evaluation planning: Who will be conducting the research and how, which data will be collected? 4. Data selection and methodology: How will the data be collected, verified, selected and analyzed? 5. Preparing the report: What is the format, who needs it? 6. Implementing the lessons learnt: Who and how will ensure that the lessons learnt are integrated into further activities? Taking the frame of the Strategic Planning Manual of the Government’s General Secretariat into account, the M&E unit will set up an evaluation plan. It will set the frame for the evaluations includ- ing its timing. It will also define the evaluation questions to be answered. A first set of evaluation questions will include the following questions: • How advanced is the implementation in relation to the different objectives? • Why is the status of the implementation of some actions more advanced than that of others? What are success factors? What are hindering factors? • To what extent are the objectives of the Proposed Strategy still relevant? • To what extent is there still coherence between the Proposed Strategy and its objectives and the EU, national and sub national policies, strategies and instruments? If it had changed: Why? • How successful and efficient has the link between the objectives of the Proposed Strategy and the existing funding sources been? In which cases has it been efficient and why? In which cases has it been less efficient and why? • To what extent does the existing governance system support the efficient implementation of the Proposed Strategy? • What is the most relevant impact of the Proposed strategy at the point of the evaluation? • How can the Proposed strategy further be integrated in existing or upcoming funding programs? These questions mentioned above could be part of the interim evaluations, which will focus on as- sessing the progress of the implementation and on governance related questions. The final evaluation will provide more comprehensive answers to the questions above. Additionally, it can include questions about potential impacts. Consequently, further additional questions for the final evaluation could be answered, as e.g.: • How did the selected indicators develop? What is the contribution of the Proposed Strategy to this development and which other relevant developments must be considered? • In how far were the objectives of the Proposed Strategy reached? Is there a difference between the objectives? _ 16 https://sgg.gov.ro/docs/File/UPP/doc/manual-planificare-strategica.pdf 78 • What were the reasons for a successful implementation of the objectives and reaching the tar- gets? What were the obstacles to not reaching them? • What are the potential upcoming needs of people living in the Mountain Area to be considered when adapting the Proposed Strategy for the future? Based on the evaluation questions, the interim evaluation as well as the final evaluation will be tendered by the M&E unit. The evaluations will be conducted by an independent external evaluation team in close cooperation with the M&E unit. The M&E unit will support the evaluation by providing data and information and by organizing stakeholder contacts for interviews, focus groups, or work- shops. It is recommended that the evaluation follows a “learning -oriented approach” focusing on questions such as “How?” and “Why?”, to get insights for improving the implementation of the Mountain Strat- egy. This would call for a theory-based evaluation approach based on the “theory of change". To strengthen the “learning-oriented approach” the recommendations should undergo a feedback loop with the stakeholders to encourage mutual learning. In terms of timing, the first interim evaluation should be conducted after about two years from the approval of the Strategy. The concrete timing shall be oriented on the planning cycles of the European ERDF and CAP funding periods. The results of the first interim evaluation should support the position of the Mountain Area in the negotiations for the new funding period 2027 and forward. The following evaluations and the final evaluation shall be in line with other relevant planning cycles. 5.3.5 Updating the Proposed Strategy Based on the results of the evaluation, the necessity of an update of the Proposed Strategy should be assessed. This activity should be done at the initiative and under the strict control of the Ministry for Agriculture and Rural Development. Any major changes to the objectives should be validated in consultation with stakeholders. 79 Sources Adascalitei, D. (2017). Cohesion policy and EU identity in Romania. Alberton, M.; Andresen, M.; Citadino, F.; Egerer, H.; Fritsch, U.;, Götsch, H.; Hoffmann, C.; Klemm, J.; Mitrofanenko, A.; Musco, E.; Noellenburg, N.; Pettita, M.; Renner, K.; Zebisch, M., & Nieves López Isquierdo. (n.d.). Outlook on climate change adaptation in the Carpathian mountains. Albertson, M., Andresen, M., & Cittadino, F. (2017). Outlook on climate change adaptation in the Carpathian mountains. Bacoş, I.-B., & Gabor, M. R. (2021). Tourism Economy. Mountain Tourism: Quantitative Analysis of Winter Destinations in Romania. ECONOMICS, 9(1), 143–159. https://doi.org/10.2478/eoik-2021- 0005 Benedek, K. (2018). Aspects in Romanian nature conservation —A review. Environmental Engineering and Management Journal, 17, 95–106. https://doi.org/10.30638/eemj.2018.011 Bucharest University of Economic Studies, Romania, & Mavrodin, C. (2021). THE EVOLUTION OF THE WORKFORCE IN AGRICULTURE IN ROMANIA. Management of Sustainable Development, 13(1), 55–60. https://doi.org/10.54989/msd-2021-0009 Camarero, L., & Oliva, J. (2019). Thinking in rural gap: Mobility and social inequalities. Palgrave Communications, 5(1), 95. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-019-0306-x Carbone, D. G. (2018). Expert analysis on geographical specificities: Mountains, Islands and Sparsely Populated Areas. Ciolac, R., Adamov, T., Iancu, T., Popescu, G., Lile, R., Rujescu, C., & Marin, D. (2019). Agritour- ism-A Sustainable Development Factor for Improving the ‘Health’ of Rural Settlements. Case Study Apuseni Mountains Area. Sustainability, 11(5), 1467. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11051467 Climate ADAPT. (2022). Mountain areas. Climate ADAPT. https://climate-adapt.eea.eu- ropa.eu/en/eu-adaptation-policy/sector-policies/mountain-areas Climate ADAPT. (2023). Adaptation in Carpathian Mountains. https://climate-adapt.eea.eu- ropa.eu/en/countries-regions/transnational-regions/carpathian-mountains/adaptation-actions Deloitte LLP. (2021). Enhancing_Rural_Connectivity_Report.pdf. https://www.voda- fone.com/sites/default/files/2021-06/Enhancing_Rural_Connectivity_Report.pdf Dumitrache, L., Nae, M., Simion, G., & Taloș, A. -M. (2020). Modelling Potential Geographical Ac- cess of the Population to Public Hospitals and Quality Health Care in Romania. International Jour- nal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(22), Article 22. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17228487 ESPON. (2020). Territorial patterns and relations in Romania . Euromontana. (2014). Strategies to increase the attractiveness of mountain areas: How to ap- proach depopulation in an integrated manner? Euromontana. (2020a). Ageing in mountain areas—Contributions of Euromontana for the Green Pa- per on Aging. Euromontana. (2020b). Towards a long-term vision of rural areas. Contributions of Euromontana for Vice-President Suica. Euromontana. (2021a). Mobility and infrastructures (ICT). Euromontana. https://www.euromon- tana.org/en/working-themes/mobility-and-infrastructures-ict/ 80 Euromontana. (2021b, November 25). Romanian mountains must do their best to remain attractive to young people, says our Vice-President Radu-Adrian Rey. Euromontana. https://www.euromon- tana.org/en/romanian-mountains-must-do-their-best-to-remain-attractive-to-young-people-says- our-vice-president-radu-adrian-rey/ Euromontana. (2022, June 23). Euromontana shares recommendations to tackle brain drain in mountain areas. Euromontana. https://www.euromontana.org/en/euromontana-shares-recommen- dations-to-tackle-brain-drain-in-mountain-areas/ European Commission. (2019). Skills mismatch & productivity in the EU. Publications Office. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2765/954687 European Commission. (2021). Inforegio—Mapping the glass ceiling: The EU regions where women thrive and where they are held back. https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/information- sources/maps/gender-equality-monitor_en European Commission. Joint Research Centre. (2021). The demographic landscape of EU territories: Challenges and opportunities in diversely ageing regions. Publications Office. https://data.eu- ropa.eu/doi/10.2760/658945 European Investment Bank. (2023). Romanian transport infrastructure: A roller coaster ride . EIB.Org. https://www.eib.org/en/products/advisory-services/passa/romanian-transport- infrastructure-roller-coaster-ride.htm European Parliament. (2019). A macro-regional strategy for the Carpathian region. European Parliament. Directorate General for Parliamentary Research Services. (2020). Older peo- ple in the European Union’s rural areas: Issues and challenges : in depth analysis. Publications Of- fice. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2861/114962 Eurostat. (2021). Regional gross domestic product (PPS per inhabitant) by NUTS 2 regions [Map]. Eurostat Explained. (2022). Urban-rural Europe—Income and living conditions. https://ec.eu- ropa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Urban-rural_Europe_-_income_and_liv- ing_conditions FAO. (2018). The gender gap in land rights. Fodor, S. (2023, July 31). Oltenia de sub Munte: The Romanian region aiming to become a UNESCO geopark. Romania Insider. https://www.romania-insider.com/oltenia-de-sub-munte-florin-stoican- jul-2023 Forget, M., & Ayroles, K. (2021). (Dis)Connected. Energy Materialities of Isolated Sites in Mountain Areas. Journal of Alpine Research | Revue de Géographie Alpine , 109–3, Article 109–3. https://journals.openedition.org/rga/9785?lang=en Global Forest Watch. (2023). Romania Interactive Forest Map & Tree Cover Change Data | GFW . https://www.globalforestwatch.org/map/country/ROU/?mainMap=eyJzaG93QW5hbHlzaXMiOn- RydWV9&map=eyJjZW50ZXIiOnsibGF0Ijo0Ni4wMTA4ODE5NzA5MDg2MywibG5nI- joyMy45NjE3NDE2NDk1Nzk3MTh9LCJ6b29tIjo2LjA4OTQ3NzA2NDk4MzI2NCwiY2FuQm91bmQiOmZhbH NlLCJkYXRhc2V0cyI6W3siZGF0YXNldCI6InBvbGl0aWNhbC1ib3VuZGFyaWVzIiwibGF5ZXJzIjpbIm- Rpc3B1dGVkLXBvbGl0aWN- hbC1ib3VuZGFyaWVzIiwicG9saXRpY2FsLWJvdW5kYXJpZXMiXSwib3BhY2l0eSI6MSwidml- zaWJpbGl0eSI6dHJ1ZX0seyJkYXRhc2V0IjoidHJlZS1jb3Zlci1sb3NzIiwibGF5ZXJzIjpbIn- RyZWUtY292ZXItbG9zcyJdLCJvcGFjaXR5IjoxLCJ2aXNpYmlsaXR5Ijp0cnVlfSx7ImRhdGFzZXQi- OiJ0cmVlLWNvdmVyIiwibGF5ZXJzIjpbInRyZWUtY292ZXItMjAxMCJdLCJvcGFjaXR5Ijox- LCJ2aXNpYmlsaXR5Ijp0cnVlfV19&mapPrompts=eyJvcGVuIjp0cnVlL- CJzdGVwc0tleSI6InN1YnNjcmliZVRvQXJlYSIsImZvcmNlIjp0cnVlfQ%3D%3D 81 Gretter, A., Machold, I., Membretti, A., & Dax, T. (2017). Pathways of Immigration in the Alps and Carpathians: Social Innovation and the Creation of a Welcoming Culture. Mountain Research and Development, 37(4), 396. https://doi.org/10.1659/MRD-JOURNAL-D-17-00031.1 Grozavu, A., & Patriche, C. (2021). Mapping landslide susceptibility at national scale by spatial multi-criteria evaluation. Guran-Nica, L., & Rusu, M. (2015). The Changing Demographic Profile of Romanian Rural Areas (Ru- ral Areas and Development). Huzui-Stoiculescu, A. (2018). Depopulation in Romanian rural areas. Kovačićek, T. (2019). The professional status of rural women in the EU. Kucsicsa, G., & Dumitrică, C. (2019). Spatial modelling of deforestation in Romanian Carpathian Mountains using GIS and Logistic Regression. Journal of Mountain Science, 16(5), 1005–1022. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11629-018-5053-8 Manta, O. (2022). Resilience and recovery policy in EU mountain regions. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4064826 Nagavciuc, V., Scholz, P., & Ionita, M. (2022). Hotspots for warm and dry summers in Romania. Nat- ural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 22(4), 1347–1369. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-22-1347- 2022 OECD. (2020). Improving Educational Equity in Romania (4; OECD Education Policy Perspectives). Otiman, P. I. (2011). STRUCTURA AGRARĂ ACTUALĂ A ROMÂNIEI – O MARE (ŞI NEREZOLVATĂ) PRO- BLEMĂ SOCIALĂ ŞI ECONOMICĂ A ŢĂRII. Păunescu, V., Kohli, D., Iliescu, A.-I., Nap, M.-E., Șuba, E.-E., & Sălăgean, T. (2022). An Evaluation of the National Program of Systematic Land Registration in Romania Using the Fit for Purpose Spa- tial Framework Principles. Land, 11(9), Article 9. https://doi.org/10.3390/land11091502 Payne, D., Spehn, E. M., Prescott, G. W., Geschke, J., Snethlage, M. A., & Fischer, M. (2020). Mountain Biodiversity Is Central to Sustainable Development in Mountains and Beyond. One Earth, 3(5), 530–533. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2020.10.013 Perlik, M., & Membretti, A. (2018). Migration by Necessity and by Force to Mountain Areas: An Op- portunity for Social Innovation. Mountain Research and Development, 38(3), 250. https://doi.org/10.1659/MRD-JOURNAL-D-17-00070.1 Popa, L. (2023). Why are forest fires such a serious problem in Romania? European Data Journalism Network – EDJNet. https://www.europeandatajournalism.eu/cp_data_news/despite-a-mild-cli- mate-forest-fires-are-a-serious-problem-in-romania/ Sala, S. (2021). Governance in mountain areas: What has changed in the last years? Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity. (2023). Main Details. Secretariat of the Con- vention on Biological Diversity. https://www.cbd.int/countries/profile/?country=ro Terzi, S., Torresan, S., Schneiderbauer, S., Critto, A., Zebisch, M., & Marcomini, A. (2019). Multi- risk assessment in mountain regions: A review of modelling approaches for climate change adapta- tion. Journal of Environmental Management, 232, 759–771. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jen- vman.2018.11.100 Ungureanu, D., Chiran, A., Leonte, E., Dona, I., & Vîntu, C. R. (2020). CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING THE LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE MOUNTAIN AREA IN ROMANIA . 20(2). World Bank. (2018). From Uneven Growth to Inclusive Development: Romania’s Path to Shared Prosperity. Washington, DC: World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-1317-7 82 World Bank. (2023). Country Climate and Development Report. World Bank & Ministerul Agriculturii și Dezvoltării Rurale. (2023). Romanian Mountain Area Diagnos- tic Report. Wu-Bing, X. (2023). Regional occupancy increases for widespread species but decreases for nar- rowly distributed species in metacommunity time series. Zeng, L., Li, R. Y. M., Nuttapong, J., Sun, J., & Mao, Y. (2022). Economic Development and Moun- tain Tourism Research from 2010 to 2020: Bibliometric Analysis and Science Mapping Approach. Sus- tainability, 14(1), 562. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14010562 83 Annex A: Methodological approach for prioritization of challenges A.1 Climate change Dimension Assessment criteria/sub-criteria Weight or score A. Environment The identified challenge has direct negative environmental consequences: HIGH A1. Climate Change high A2. Natural Hazards high A3. Air, Water and Soil Quality medium A4. Biodiversity and stress of natural resources high B. Social The identified challenge has direct negative social consequences: MEDIUM B1. Public health and safety high B2. Demographic Structure low B3. Income distribution and social protection low B4. Identity and Traditions low C. Economic The identified challenge has direct negative economic consequences: HIGH C1. Employment Level high C2. Economic Diversification medium C3. Regional GDP medium C4. Critical economic sectors17 high The climate crisis has the potential to have a significant negative impact on Romania’s mountain regions. The likely damage to the environment is considerable and the social dimension will also be affected in various cri- teria. The economic dimension is particularly affected, as current and future critical economic sectors are highly dependent on climatic factors and will likely be negatively influenced. The overall severity is therefore high, as it changes the basis of life for humans and nature in mountainous regions to an unknown extent. A.2 Loss of biodiversity Dimension Assessment criteria/sub-criteria Weight or score A. Environment The identified challenge has direct negative environmental consequences: HIGH A1. Climate Change medium A2. Natural Hazards medium A3. Air, Water and Soil Quality high A4. Biodiversity and stress of natural resources high _ 17 Sectors that are of significant relevance to the region or have the clear prospect of becoming so. Currently, this category puts the emphasis on the sectors of agriculture and tourism. 84 Dimension Assessment criteria/sub-criteria Weight or score B. Social The identified challenge has direct negative social consequences: MEDIUM B1. Public health and safety medium B2. Demographic Structure low B3. Income distribution and social protection low B4. Identity and Traditions high C. Economic The identified challenge has direct negative economic consequences: HIGH C1. Employment Level medium C2. Economic Diversification medium C3. Regional GDP medium C4. Critical economic sectors high The damage to biodiversity can be judged as threatening to various dimensions and criteria. In particular, the potentially intensifying interactions with climate change and the dense connection of current economic infra- structures with the environment and nature lead to considerable dependence on a good status of biodiversity for the mountain regions. The overall judgement is therefore a high potential severity level. A.3 Accessibility (road/rail/digital/electricity network) Dimension Assessment criteria/sub-criteria Weight or score A. Environment The identified challenge has direct negative environmental consequences: LOW A1. Climate Change medium A2. Natural Hazards low A3. Air, Water and Soil Quality low A4. Biodiversity and stress of natural resources low B. Social The identified challenge has direct negative social consequences: MEDIUM B1. Public health and safety high B2. Demographic Structure low B3. Income distribution and social protection medium B4. Identity and Traditions low C. Economic The identified challenge has direct negative economic consequences: HIGH C1. Employment Level medium C2. Economic Diversification high C3. Regional GDP medium C4. Critical economic sectors medium The population and the economy cannot develop optimally in the wake of poor connectivity. The economic dimension in particular is impacted, and spin-off effects create negative impacts on the social sector. Environ- mental aspects are not particularly affected. Therefore, the level of damage assumed in the area of connec- tivity is medium compared to the other challenges. 85 A.4 Limited access to basic services Dimension Assessment criteria/sub-criteria Weight or score A. Environment The identified challenge has direct negative environmental consequences: LOW A1. Climate Change low A2. Natural Hazards low A3. Air, Water and Soil Quality low A4. Biodiversity and stress of natural resources low B. Social The identified challenge has direct negative social consequences: HIGH B1. Public health and safety high B2. Demographic Structure medium B3. Income distribution and social protection high B4. Identity and Traditions low C. Economic The identified challenge has direct negative economic consequences: MEDIUM C1. Employment Level medium C2. Economic Diversification high C3. Regional GDP low C4. Critical economic sectors medium Reduced access to basic services tends to make mountain regions unattractive for people and as a spin-off ef- fect also for businesses. This results in a competitive disadvantage, which can, however, be partially compen- sated for under certain circumstances. The environmental criteria are not particularly affected by this. There- fore, reduced access to basic services has a medium degree of severity. A.5 Depopulation and aging population Dimension Assessment criteria/sub-criteria Weight or score A. Environment The identified challenge has direct negative environmental consequences: LOW A1. Climate Change low A2. Natural Hazards low A3. Air, Water and Soil Quality low A4. Biodiversity and stress of natural resources low B. Social The identified challenge has direct negative social consequences: HIGH B1. Public health and safety low B2. Demographic Structure high B3. Income distribution and social protection low B4. Identity and Traditions high C. Economic The identified challenge has direct negative economic consequences: HIGH C1. Employment Level medium C2. Economic Diversification medium 86 Dimension Assessment criteria/sub-criteria Weight or score C3. Regional GDP high C4. Critical economic sectors high The depopulation and ageing of the population of the mountain region has immense negative potential, as it impacts all major criteria in some way. This phenomenon has been identified as a key challenge, as it can in- teract to amplify other unfavorable influences and is furthermore prone to creating a spiraling effect and downwards trend. Especially in the area of work and social cohesion, grave consequences are to be expected. Consequently, it is given a high severity rating. A.6 Decreasing role of agriculture Dimension Assessment criteria/sub-criteria Weight or score A. Environment The identified challenge has direct negative environmental consequences: LOW A1. Climate Change low A2. Natural Hazards medium A3. Air, Water and Soil Quality low A4. Biodiversity and stress of natural resources low B. Social The identified challenge has direct negative social consequences: HIGH B1. Public health and safety medium B2. Demographic Structure high B3. Income distribution and social protection medium B4. Identity and Traditions high C. Economic The identified challenge has direct negative economic consequences: HIGH C1. Employment Level high C2. Economic Diversification medium C3. Regional GDP medium C4. Critical economic sectors high The declining importance of agriculture is already continuously bringing change to the region. As a major sec- tor, its decline is upsetting for the region and creates considerable needs for diversification. As agriculture is not only an economic aspect, but also considerably influences the social dimension and identity and traditions, this area is considered to have a high severity. A.7 Lack of employment opportunities Dimension Assessment criteria/sub-criteria Weight or score A. Environment The identified challenge has direct negative environmental consequences: LOW A1. Climate Change low A2. Natural Hazards low A3. Air, Water and Soil Quality low A4. Biodiversity and stress of natural resources low 87 Dimension Assessment criteria/sub-criteria Weight or score B. Social The identified challenge has direct negative social consequences: MEDIUM B1. Public health and safety low B2. Demographic Structure high B3. Income distribution and social protection high B4. Identity and Traditions low C. Economic The identified challenge has direct negative economic consequences: HIGH C1. Employment Level high C2. Economic Diversification medium C3. Regional GDP high C4. Critical economic sectors medium The lack of job opportunities affects the Romanian mountain regions in many ways. Especially in the economic and social spheres, this situation creates unfavorable conditions. Even if this factor is surpassed by a few chal- lenges in terms of severity in the given area, and more specifically decline of key sectors is presenting a bigger challenge than broader lack of employment, it falls into the medium classification due to its potential high impacts on the economy in particular. A.8 Social inclusion Dimension Assessment criteria/sub-criteria Weight or score A. Environment The identified challenge has direct negative environmental consequences: LOW A1. Climate Change low A2. Natural Hazards low A3. Air, Water and Soil Quality low A4. Biodiversity and stress of natural resources low B. Social The identified challenge has direct negative social consequences: HIGH B1. Public health and safety high B2. Demographic Structure medium B3. Income distribution and social protection high B4. Identity and Traditions high C. Economic The identified challenge has direct negative economic consequences: MEDIUM C1. Employment Level medium C2. Economic Diversification medium C3. Regional GDP low C4. Critical economic sectors medium Social inclusion currently shows significant gaps in the Mountain Area and by its nature has a particular impact on the social dimension. This has a knock-on effect on the economic dimension. The environmental dimension is not particularly affected. However, on the basis of the criteria taken into account as a whole, it appears to be similarly serious as some other phenomena, which is why it is rated as medium in this assessment. 88 A.9 Imprecise governance and mismatch of policies Dimension Assessment criteria/sub-criteria Weight or score A. Environment The identified challenge has direct negative environmental consequences: MEDIUM A1. Climate Change medium A2. Natural Hazards medium A3. Air, Water and Soil Quality medium A4. Biodiversity and stress of natural resources high B. Social The identified challenge has direct negative social consequences: MEDIUM B1. Public health and safety medium B2. Demographic Structure medium B3. Income distribution and social protection low B4. Identity and Traditions low C. Economic The identified challenge has direct negative economic consequences: MEDIUM C1. Employment Level medium C2. Economic Diversification medium C3. Regional GDP medium C4. Critical economic sectors high Imprecise governance and mismatch of policies have both far-reaching and uncertain consequences that are difficult to predict. The potential impacts are broad, however can vary between fields or dimensions. Further- more, this is a cross-cutting issue, which means that this field is assigned a medium severity. (1) Climate change As a global phenomenon, the effects of the climate crisis on the Romanian mountain region can hardly be averted (Alberton, M.; Andresen, M.; Citadino, F.; Egerer, H.; Fritsch, U.; et al., n.d., p. 22,25,26). Concerning the Romanian mountain regions, a climate change induced anomaly in autumn precipitation already has been registered (World Bank, 2023, p. 41). The consequences are generally difficult to assess, but an increased risk to humans and the environment from natural disasters, among other things, can be expected. Consequently, this is also difficult to push back at the local level and a high probability of occurrence and persistence can be assumed. (2) Loss of biodiversity Similarly, the decline in biodiversity is a wide-reaching thematic, but the general evidence is clear. There is a trend of 20% of the total arable land becoming decertified and furthermore less than 10% of once common grassland and shallow marsh ecosystems still remain (Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, 2023). It can be addressed at regional and local levels to a certain extent (Benedek, 2018, p. 101). Damage to biodiversity resulting from the climate crisis, on the other hand, is more complex to address. Considering the current low level of effective action, a high probability of occurrence is assumed for this topic. (3) Accessibility (road/rail/digital/electricity net work) Severe gaps in accessibility in the various sub-regions can already be identified. By Example, with about 900 km length, Romania has one of the smallest highway networks across the member states while being the 8th largest by total area. Furthermore, the average speed of trains ranges between 15 to 40 km/h, depending on whether it is a freight or a passenger rail (European Investment Bank, 89 2023) The mountainous regions do not make an exception in this regard. Due to uneven geological and physical features, the establishment of networks of any kind has been a challenge. However, since concrete and effective measures can realistically be implemented, the assessment settles at a medium level (European Parliament, 2019, p. 5). (4) Reduced access to basic services Reduced access to basic services is a well-known problem and should therefore be considered with a high probability of occurrence and a historically high persistence. For example, in remote parts of the mountain region, residents have to travel by car for several hours on average to reach a hospital of the highest level I or II (Dumitrache et al., 2020). Nevertheless, access to basic services can be improved for the population even with selective measures, which is why a medium rating is reason- able. (Euromontana, 2021b) (5) Depopulation and aging population Depopulation and ageing of the population is a dynamic phenomenon. Even though some regions in Romania are even more clearly affected, for a large part of the municipalities in the mountain region there is a shrinkage of moderate to strong proportions. Internal and external migration flows intensify the negative demographic dynamic of rural areas compared to urban centers (Guran-Nica & Rusu, 2015, p. 131). Although the general direction of development can be observed since several years, it is also subject to unexpected turns and external influences. However, since an overall increase in the region’s prosperity can be expected to be accompanied by an improvement in demographics, this challenge has a medium level of probability of occurrence or persistence. (Huzui-Stoiculescu, 2018, pp. 9, 13) (6) Decreasing role of agriculture The decline of agriculture is a long and deep process that will probably persist in the region in the near future (Otiman, 2011, p. 340). Even it is a supra-regional trend, job loss is threatening on a collective and individual level. Moreover, the already disadvantaged group of women are particularly affected (Bucharest University of Economic Studies, Romania & Mavrodin, 2021, p. 59). Nevertheless, it can be assumed that this process will settle down at a certain level due to the pursued diversifica- tion of the economy and the creation of new jobs. For this reason, a medium degree of persistence can be observed for this issue in the Romanian mountain region. (7) Lack of employment opportunities The lack of job opportunities is a recent phenomenon in relative terms, which also depends heavily on the development of critical sectors. Analyses have shown that there is a mismatch of skilled labor supply and demand (European Commission, 2019, pp. 10, 12). Because the current state is in need of improvement, a medium probability of occurrence/persistence can be exhibited with regard to the rapidly responding dynamics of a labor market. (8) Social inclusion Given the theme of social inclusion, deficiencies are already real. By example, the Romanian moun- tainous regions are show some of the lowest results in the “Female Achievement Index” across the regions of the member states (European Commission, 2021). At the same time, they can be well addressed, even on a local scale. Therefore, a low probability of occurrence or persistence can be assumed if suitable strategies are in place. (9) Imprecise governance and mismatch of policies Regarding the imprecise government and mismatch of policies, a medium impact can be observed in terms of persistence (Ungureanu et al., 2020, p. 507). It is noted that transposition and personaliza- tion of policies is crucial to create a governance, which also takes the special requirements of moun- tain regions in account (Manta, 2022). Some of the policy impacts have a long unfolding time, but, on the other hand, some can also be countered quickly (Benedek, 2018, p. 103). 90 Annex B: Measures and Operational Indicators Specific objective Expected outcome Measures Indicator Unit Common indicator Source Pillar I: Strategic Objective I: Enhance the attractiveness and inclusiveness of small Mountain towns and rural areas to multigenerational Mountain communities. Objective 1: Increased access to 1.1: Developing community health Number of community number RCR73: Annual number MySMIS, monitoring Improve Mountain quality social ser- and social assistance centers in health centers of users of new or up- system residents’ access to vices Mountain hub towns graded healthcare fa- quality healthcare, 1.2: Establishing telehealth, mo- cilities. 6S9: Annual education and other bile health, and elder care in re- number of users of social services in mote parts of the Mountain Area new or upgraded social towns and rural ar- assistance units 1.3: Developing daycare, kinder- eas garten, after-school programming, People having access number Evaluation “Health” and innovative schooling models in to mobile health program and other Mountain rural areas programs supporting 1.4: Developing integrated pro- the measures grams for attracting and retaining Number of patients number 01PSR14: Number of MySMIS, monitoring essential workers and profession- evaluated/cared for patients evalu- system als to/in Mountain rural areas ated/cared for Annual number of us- number RCR71: Annual number MIPE ers of new or upgraded of users of new or up- educational structures graded educational structures Percentage of children % Number of children en- National Institute of in daycare rolled in kindergarten Statistics (Territorial observatory) Number of participants number Annual implementa- in supported programs tion reports – evalua- tion across programs 91 Specific objective Expected outcome Measures Indicator Unit Common indicator Source Percentage of partici- % Additional evaluation pants employed in the making use of ESF mountain area after 6 common indicator months Objective 2: Improved living 2.1: Supporting the installation of Population benefiting number Electricity generation ESPON LOCATE Improve building conditions: access off-grid technologies in remote from off- grid technol- by photovoltaic tech- quality and access to basic utilities parts of the Mountain Area ogies installed nology and wind on- to basic utilities in and selected build- 2.2: Expanding and upgrading util- shore in MWh/km2 small Mountain ing upgrades ity connections in more densely (proxy) towns and rural populated Mountain areas Population connected share Percentage of house- Population and Hous- parts of the Moun- 2.3: Improving housing quality in to utility networks holds connected to the ing Census (Territorial tain Area. risk-prone areas and vulnerable sewerage network observatory) Mountain communities electricity supply net- Number of improved number Population and Hous- 2.4: Subsidizing critically-needed houses work piped water hot ing Census (Territorial improvements to public buildings water observatory) Number of improved number Percentage of dwell- Territorial observatory public buildings ings with bathroom toilet Objective 3: Increased commu- 3.1: Supporting and amplifying Participants in sup- number Participation rate in Eurostat Revitalize civic and nity involvement in “smart village” and other commu- ported events and pro- education and training cultural life in setting up bottom- nity-driven social innovation initi- grams (proxy) Mountain towns and up initiatives, social atives Number of municipali- number Annual implementa- Mountain rural ar- innovations and cul- 3.2: Supporting youth-oriented ties with supported ac- tion reports – evalua- eas tural events community initiatives and youth tivities tion across programs programming Number of cultural and number RCO77: Number of cul- Smart Growth pro- 3.3: Supporting cultural activities tourist sites supported tural and tourist sites gramme relating to Mountain traditions supported and heritage, as well as diversity and innovation 92 Specific objective Expected outcome Measures Indicator Unit Common indicator Source Objective 4: Economic protec- 4.1: Developing an economic in- Number of vulnerable Number Additional evaluation Economically sup- tion of “at risk” clusion program for qualifying res- mountain population done in strategy im- port and protect Mountain communi- idents of “at risk” Mountain com- benefiting from sup- plementation based on “at-risk” rural ties munities port. monitoring from all Mountain communi- 4.2: Helping subsistence farmers programs18 ties. and rural households diversify Number of subsistence Number their incomes farmers accessing sup- port for non-agricul- ture business develop- ment and training. Pillar II: Strategic Objective II: Enhance Mountain Area residents’ transportation and physical connectivity. Objective 5: Improved and 5.1: Developing mobility services Capacity of environ- passengers RCO57: Capacity of Transport programme Enable Mountain greener transporta- with a focus on facilitating Moun- mentally friendly roll- green rolling stock for residents’ mobility tion services and in- tain rural residents’ access to hub ing stock for collective collective public within and beyond frastructure towns and urban centers public transport transport the Mountain Area 5.2: Repairing and developing tar- Average travel time to minutes Accessibility potential ESPON Accessibility geted green mobility infrastruc- urban centers by pub- by rail Scenarios ture lic transport Objective 6: Increased access to 6.1: Expanding internet infrastruc- Share of population share Percentage of house- Eurostat Enable more Moun- high-quality inter- ture in small towns and rural ar- with access to broad- holds with broadband tain Area residents net and digital ser- eas band internet access to benefit from in- vices 6.2: Endowing communities with Participants in imple- share Participation rate in Eurostat ternet access equipment for internet access mented services and education and training 6.3: Develop Mountain Area’s resi- trainings supporting (proxy) dents digital competences digital competences _ 18 Requires the definition of “vulnerable population” taking into account factors such as altitude, driving time (car and public transport) to urban centers, to public services (schools, healthcare, administration etc.), and depopulation rates. Grid-based definition requires additional monitoring efforts. Municipality-based definitions can be used for approximation. 93 Specific objective Expected outcome Measures Indicator Unit Common indicator Source Pillar III: Strategic Objective III: Stimulate the Mountain Area's economic opportunities, while capitalizing on its regional strengths Objective 7: Increased valoriza- 7.1: Enhancing the provision of Number of farmers number R1 CAP Common Agricultural Enable profitable tion of Mountain agrifood support services through benefiting from ad- Policy indicators and competitive agrifood bioecon- multistakeholder partnerships and vice, training, Mountain agrifood omy Mountain-focused knowledge and knowledge exchange value chains innovation networks or participating in EIP 7.2: Strengthening collective ac- Number of advisors re- number R2 CAP Common Agricultural tion for value chain self-organiza- ceiving support to be Policy indicators tion and competitiveness improve- integrated in the AKIS ments Share of farmers carry- % Common Agricultural 7.3: Enhancing food safety compli- ing the „mountain Policy indicators ance and the sustainable commer- product“ label cialization of high-value foraged foods Share of farms benefit- % R16 CAP Common Agricultural 7.4: Expanding targeted support ting from CAP invest- Policy indicators for quality differentiation and ment contributing to marketing of Mountain agrifood climate change mitiga- products tion and adaption 7.5: Expanding efforts around Share of young farmers % Common Agricultural Mountain agrifood product market Policy indicators development and promotion Share of farms partici- % R10, CAP Common Agricultural 7.6: Enhancing the climate resili- pating in producer Policy indicators ence of Mountain agrifood value groups, producer or- chains, through local technology ganizations, local mar- adaptation (machinery/equip- kets, short supply ment) & adoption of improved chain circuits and practices quality schemes 7.7: Integral support to Mountain farm successors and agro-entre- preneurs 7.8: Supporting the transfer of land to active Mountain farmers 94 Specific objective Expected outcome Measures Indicator Unit Common indicator Source 7.9: Provision of targeted tech- nical support to Mountain agrifood producers to overcome adminis- trative and legal barriers to ac- cessing CAP/PNS and other public sector support 7.10: Expanding mechanisms to facilitate agrifood producers’ ac- cess to finance Objective 8: Improved economic 8.1: Supporting sustainable timber Number of foresters number Additional evaluation Strengthening eco- perspectives in the and non-timber value chain devel- and processors bene- based on Common Ag- nomic opportunities forest bioeconomy opments with a focus on enhanced fiting from infrastruc- ricultural Policy imple- in the Mountain for- technology adoption/infra-struc- ture improvements mentation monitoring est bioeconomy ture and training/skills system (and the nonfood 8.2: Strengthened quality assur- Participants in training number Participation rate in Eurostat bioeconomy at ance, product differentiation and programs education and training large) market transparency in timber (proxy) and non-timber forest products Employment in the number, share Civilian employed pop- National Institute of 8.3: Support for Mountain bioe- forest industry ulation (by activity Statistics (Territorial conomy research and development fields) observatory) 8.4: Stimulating demand for Moun- tain bioeconomy products and ser- vices Objective 9: Increased economic 9.1: Strengthening actors and ef- Number of cultural and number RCO77: Number of cul- Smart Growth pro- Increase the eco- relevance of sus- forts relating to the promotion of tourist sites supported tural and tourist sites gramme nomic weight Moun- tainable tourism in Mountain tourism supported tain tourism rural areas and 9.2: Enhancing the quality and Number of visitor man- number Number of overnight National Institute of small-towns modernization of tourism facilities agement plans stays in tourist accom- Statistics (Territorial and services in Mountain hubs adopted modation facilities observatory) Touristic overnight number stays 95 Specific objective Expected outcome Measures Indicator Unit Common indicator Source 9.3: Investing in shared tourism Bed places available number Tourist accommoda- National Institute of infrastructure based on strategic tion establishments Statistics (Territorial planning with tourist accommo- observatory) 9.4: Supporting the involvement dation functions of rural and small town SMEs in the Mountain tourism economy, with a focus on urban-rural link- ages (aligned to SMEs section be- low) 9.5: Sustainable planning, devel- oping, and managing tourist flows to small Mountain towns and rural areas 9.6: Anticipating and mitigating climate threats and unwanted so- cial and environmental impacts of tourism on small Mountain towns and rural areas Objective 10: Increased number 10.1: Strengthening business de- SMEs introducing mar- number RCR04: SMEs introduc- POCIDIF; SMIS Support SMEs, en- of financially viable velopment and acceleration ser- keting or organiza- ing marketing or or- trepreneurship, and SMEs and entrepre- vices for Mountain micro and tional innovation ganisational innova- the development of neurs across a SMEs, entrepreneurs, and busi- tions smart specialization range of sectors nesses in smart specialization sec- Small and medium- number RCR03: Small and me- POCIDIF; SMIS; MySMIS, industries across tors (including agrifood, forestry, sized enterprises dium-sized enterprises monitoring reports sectors and tourism) (SMEs) introducing (SMEs) introducing 10.2: Facilitating industry-level in- product or process in- product or process in- novation aligned with smart spe- novation novations cialization and improve the busi- ness enabling environment. Enterprises supported number RCO02: Companies RCO02: Smart Growth with financial and non- supported by grants and Health pro- 10.3: Establish financing schemes financial support RCO03: Companies gramme; RCO03: and instruments targeting Moun- supported by financial Smart Growth and Sus- tain SMEs and businesses in smart instruments, RCO04: tainable development programme; RCO04: 96 Specific objective Expected outcome Measures Indicator Unit Common indicator Source specialization sectors (including Enterprises receiving Smart Growth pro- agrifood, forestry, and tourism) non- financial support gramme 10.4: Develop market-aligned vo- cational and professional training programs involving economic op- erators, and attracting in-demand technical and professional skills Pillar IV: Strategic Objective IV: Protect, restore, and nurture the integrity, health, and resilience of Mountain ecosystems and biodiversity Objective 11: Healthy and inte- 11.1: Improving forest use moni- Area under protection km², share Area of protected ar- Protected areas and Assure the integrity gral protected for- toring, zoning, and timber track- eas; Surface area of Natura 2000: Ministry and health of Moun- ests, grasslands and ing, in alignment with provisions Natura 2000 sites Of Development, Pub- tain protected for- other ecosystems of the Forest Strategy 2030 RCO37: Area of Natura lic Works and Admin- ests, grasslands, 11.2: Improving and implementing 2000 sites subject to istration RCO37: Sus- and other ecosys- eco-compensation relating to bio- protection and resto- tainable development tems, and strictly diversity protections with a focus ration measures programme protected old- on adequately compensating for- Population affected by share Percentage of persons EU-SILC (ad-hoc ex- growth and primary est owners and expand the use of energy poverty affected by lack of ad- traction from HH050), forests. payments for environmental ser- equate heating At-risk- Eurostat vices of-poverty rate 11.3: Supporting sustainable en- Restauration measures area Monitoring of the na- ergy biomass use to combat en- supported by the na- tional forest fund ergy poverty tional forest fund 11.4: Supporting Mountain Forest owners’ take-up of forest-conser- vation practices, technologies, and infrastructure 11.5: Encouraging the revitaliza- tion and climate-adaptation of high-altitude pastoralism 11.6: Supporting social-ecological research on effective ecosystem 97 Specific objective Expected outcome Measures Indicator Unit Common indicator Source restoration and management ap- proaches, notably for grasslands and forests 11.7: Restoring, rehabilitating, or rewilding degraded ecosystems 11.8: Ensuring the effective man- agement of protected areas, in- cluding through civic and commu- nity participation Objective 12: Improved soil and 12.1: Investing in residential Population connected number RCR42: Population Sustainable develop- Improve soil and water quality, as wastewater treatment with a fo- to public waste water connected to at least ment programme water quality and well as mitigation cus on nutrient pollution hotspots facilities or access to secondary public mitigate climate of climate change 12.2: Reducing pollution and in- off-grid solution waste water treatment change (mitigate creasing carbon sequestration in facilities and prevent envi- agriculture with a focus on soil Share of UAA under % R14, CAP Common Agricultural ronmental and cli- and manure management supported commit- Policy indicators mate pollution) 12.3: Protecting and enhancing ments to reduce emis- carbon sinks with a focus on en- sions or to maintain or hancing tree and other vegetative enhance carbon stor- cover age 12.4: Mitigating greenhouse gas Share of forest and % Share of forest area National Institute of emissions with a focus on residen- other vegetation land- Statistics (Territorial tial heating and transportation cover classes observatory) or 12.5: Assessing and developing CORINE Land Cover carbon finance opportunities across Mountain sectors Number of number Territorial observatory flats/houses benefiting 12.6: Continuing to remediate and from increased energy reconvert contaminated sites efficient heating or isolation Reconverted contami- number, area Additional evaluation, nated sites based on funding pro- grams implementation 98 Specific objective Expected outcome Measures Indicator Unit Common indicator Source Objective 13: Increased social- 13.1: Developing climate change Number of climate number RCR37: Population Sustainable develop- Enhance the social- ecological resili- adaptation and disaster emer- change adaption and benefiting from cli- ment program ecological resili- ence vis-à-vis cli- gency plans at the local and mas- disaster emergency mate-related natural ence of the Moun- mate- related risks sif levels plans disasters other than tain Area in the and other natural 13.2: Developing disaster response floods or wildfires face of climate and hazards capacity in small Mountain towns (proxy) other risks and rural areas Investments in new or EUR RCO24: Investments in Sustainable develop- 13.3: Building environmental optimized systems for new or optimised sys- ment program awareness through school and pro- monitoring, prepared- tems for monitoring, fessional training curricula and ness, alerting and re- preparedness, alerting certification requirements sponse to natural dis- and response to natu- asters ral disasters Population benefiting number RCR37: Population Sustainable develop- from protection benefiting from cli- ment program measures against cli- mate-related natural mate related natural disasters (other than disasters floods or wildfires) Pillar V: Strategic Objective V: Empower the Mountain Area to determine and pursue its own aspirations Objective 14: Increased represen- 14.1: Strengthening the national Investment through ITI EUR Monitoring systems of Increase the repre- tation of Mountain National Mountain Area Agency the EU funds sentation of Moun- stakeholders in pol- and its advisory bodies Participants in training number Participation rate in Eurostat tain stakeholders in icymaking 14.2: Increasing Mountain authori- programs implemented education and training relevant policymak- ties’ policymaking roles and ca- (proxy) ing pacities 14.3: Enhancing mechanisms for stakeholder consultation and par- ticipation in local planning and policy-making Objective 15: A supportive, ser- 15.1: Developing a supportive and Participants in training number of local au- Participation rate in Eurostat Foster more sup- vice-oriented cul- service-oriented culture in local for local authorities thorities trained education and training portive service on (proxy) 99 Specific objective Expected outcome Measures Indicator Unit Common indicator Source the part of public- ture in public- fac- government and public-facing Users of new and opti- users/year RCR11: Users of new RCR11: POCIDIF; SMIS; facing government ing government in- parts of government agencies mized public digital and optimised public Smart Growth, Health entities operating stitutions and local 15.2: Piloting e-government and services and products digital services and and Sustainable devel- in the Mountain authorities innovative administrative service and processes products and processes opment programme Area delivery models catering to rural RCR12: Users of new RCR12: Smart Growth and remote Mountain residents and optimized digital programme 15.3: Establish specific mecha- services, products and nisms to help Mountain stakehold- processes developed ers access available public by businesses funding and technical resources Availability of grant share of regions Additional evaluation and handle administrative require- writing and adminis- by the strategy, based ments trative assistance enti- on supported activities ties to stakeholders 100 www.poca.ro