Romania has the largest share of rural population among Central and Eastern Europe countries but its rural areas are poor, with deteriorating infrastructure and inadequate water and sanitation services. Studies suggest that social passivity, a common problem in post-socialist communities, is a hurdle to development in the rural areas.

The World Bank-funded Rural Development Project (RDP) was designed to respond to these poverty and capacity challenges by strengthening local community and government partnerships through joint training and work on development of new water supply and local road rehabilitation investments. A special emphasis was placed on low cost and most affordable solutions, empowerment of citizens to be more active in community investment decisions, and monitoring accountability of public works investments.

The RDP helped to substantially increase access to infrastructure by poor communities in a sustainable way, but the benefits from the project were highest in terms of capacity building. Local capacity to plan, implement, operate, and maintain small infrastructure was significantly improved. Seventeen associations of communes were created, with spin-off associations outside project support. Capacity was built in respect to participatory planning, project implementation, and operation and maintenance (O&M) in all beneficiary communes-- multisectoral groups of trainers were created to assist local communities with public investment mobilization and execution. Sustainability of investments was ensured by creating O&M communal services and ensuring O&M resources to the local budgets. Eleven of 17 commune associations were selected as beneficiaries under EU grant-training for EU Leader and Local Action Groups.

The project was pioneering in ECA as the first highly participatory community driven rural infrastructure project which directly focused capacity building on local government/communes without working through NGOs. The impact evaluation, unique not only in ECA but Bank-wide, used a quasi-experimental design (treatment and control groups, before and after) that was extensive and rigorous. Non-RDP communes have requested project materials for replication.

"It was difficult to choose among so many needs of the community. People could not believe that they can make decisions for themselves, and that what they choose - roads or drinking water - would become reality. Now they are happy because this is what they wanted and needed, and it was their choice. Thanks to the Rural Development Project, we could modernize our village life." — Vergica Sovaila, Mayor of Calarasi Commune, Dolj County

"The Rural development Project aimed at involving local communities in their own problem solving. The results have been spectacular. From lack of trust and feeling that nothing will ever be achieved, the Project succeeded to get the local communities involved. The community was much more careful and responsible in project planning and implementation. The project helped build the institutional capacity of local authorities to further access the European funds and use them. We made a few years leap ahead in the history . . ." — Iuliu Pacurariu, Chairman of the National Steering Committee for the RDP, Advisor of the Minister of Administration and Interior

• Over 800 km of rehabilitated roads have reduced travel time to schools, markets and health centers by 10 percent to 20 percent, and made more villages that were often isolated by flood or snow accessible year-round (71 percent in 2006 as compared to 43 percent in 2002).
• Access to running water has improved as a result of 400 km of newly built water supply lines. Household connections for water supply increased from 24 percent in 2002 to 75 percent in 2008.
• Associations of communes were created in rural areas and the majority of communes allocate budget resources for the operation and maintenance of infrastructure developed under this project.
• There is heightened civic awareness in many rural areas -- 58 percent of communes closed wells identified as a public health liability through project testing.
• Commune Investment Advisory Committees have become active in local governance processes like budgeting, prioritizing public investments, etc.

• A multi-sectoral training team working at the local level was critical in building capacity of communities and helping them solve problems in real time, which could not have been possible through formal training courses.
• More rigorous impact evaluation requires extra efforts and may show less substantial results, but is worth it to give credibility and assurance of the project contribution.
• It is important to create national level awareness of local achievements to help sustain and replicate completed projects.

• Ministry of Public Administration and Reform

Government Implementation Team:

• Project Management Unit Bucharest
• Project Implementation Unit Botosani
• Project Implementation Unit Calarasi County
• Project Implementation Unit Dolj County
• Project Implementation Unit Salaj County
• Project Implementation Unit Tulcea County

• Romania Rural Development Project