ACTA GEOGRAPHICA GEOGRAFSKI ZBORNIK SLOVENICA 2020 60 1 ACTA GEOGRAPHICA SLOVENICA GEOGRAFSKI ZBORNIK 60-1 • 2020 Contents Mojca POKLAR Comparison of the sonar recording method and the aerial photography methodfor mapping seagrass meadows 7 Vanja PAVLUKOVIÆ, Uglješa STANKOV, Daniela ARSENOVIÆ Social impacts of music festivals: A comparative study of Sziget (Hungary) and Exit (Serbia) 21 Péter János KISS, Csaba TÖLGYESI, Imola BÓNI, László ERDŐS, András VOJTKÓ,István Elek MAÁK, Zoltán BÁTORI The effects of intensive logging on the capacity of karst dolines to provide potential microrefugia for cool-adapted plants 37 Radu SĂGEATĂ Commercial services and urban space reconversion in Romania (1990–2017) 49 Kristina IVANÈIÈ, Jernej JEŽ, Blaž MILANIÈ, Špela KUMELJ, Andrej ŠMUC Application of a mass movement susceptibility model in the heterogeneous Miocene clastic successions of the Slovenj Gradec Basin, northeast Slovenia 1 Andrej GOSAR Measurements of tectonic micro-displacements within the Idrija fault zone in the Uèjavalley (W Slovenia) 79 Piotr RANIAK, Sławomir DOROCKI, Anna WINIARCZYK-RANIAK Economic resilienceofthe command andcontrolfunctionof citiesin Centraland EasternEurope 95 Mateja FERK, Rok CIGLIÈ, Blaž KOMAC, Dénes LÓCZY Management of small retention ponds and their impact on flood hazard prevention in the Slovenske Gorice Hills 107 Gregor KOVAÈIÈ Sediment production in flysch badlands: A case study from Slovenian Istria 127 Vesna LUKIÆ, Aleksandar TOMAŠEVIÆ Immigrant integration regimes in Europe: Incorporating the Western Balkan countries 143 Mitja DURNIK Community development: LocalImmigrationPartnershipsin Canadaand implications forSlovenia 155 ISSN 1581-6613 9 771581 661010 COMMERCIAL SERVICES AND URBAN SPACE RECONVERSION IN ROMANIA (1990–2017) Radu Săgeată »Afi Cotroceni«, the biggest mall in Romania (over 90,000 sqm, commercial surface), was open on Oct. 29, 2009. The structure was built in a former industrial area (Electrical Equipment Plant, Bucharest). DOI: https://doi.org/10.3986/AGS.6995 UDC: 911.375.12:339.378.2(498) COBISS: 1.01 Radu Săgeată1 Commercial services and urban space reconversion in Romania (1990–2017) ABSTRACT:Concentrating incomes in large cities has encouraged the development of specialist services andtheopeningofbigcommercialunits.ThedownfallofideologicalbarrierseastoftheformerIronCurtain made global culture combine with endemic sub-cultures, influenced by the living standard. The only lim­itation of this process appears to be social segregation which restricts demand and creates preferential segments of users. In Romania, financial segregation is directly reflected in the commercial investment made in Bucharest and in the large cities, mostly in the centre and western part of the country. The paper analysesthecorrelationoffinancialandcommercialservices,aswellastheirlocationanddispersionstrate­gies at the level of the Romanian urban system. KEY WORDS: globalization, urban spatial reconversion, services, commercial investments, Romania Trgovske storitve inponovnapreobrazbamestnega prostora vRomuniji(1990–2017) POVZETEK: Zgošèanje dohodka v velikih mestih je spodbudilo razvoj specializiranih storitev in odpi­ranjevelikihtrgovskihsredišè.Zaradipadcaideološkihovirvzhodnoodnekdanježeleznezavesesejezaèela globalna kultura mešati z lokalnimi subkulturami, kolikor jim je to dopušèal življenjski standard. Edina slabosttegaprocesajesocialnasegregacija,kiomejujepovpraševanjeinustvarjaprednostnesegmenteuporab­nikov.VRomunijisefinanènasegregacijaneposrednokaževnaložbahvgradnjotrgovskihsredišèvBukarešti in veèjih mestih, zlasti v osrednjem in zahodnem delu države. V èlanku avtor analizira povezavo med finanènimi in trgovskimi storitvami ter strategije, povezane z njihovim umešèanjem in razpršenostjo na ravni romunskega urbanega sistema. KLJUÈNE BESEDE: globalizacija, ponovna preobrazba mestnega prostora, storitve, naložbe v trgovska središèa, Romunija The paper was submitted for publication on April 26th, 2018. Uredništvo je prejelo prispevek 26. aprila 2018. 1 Romanian Academy, Institute of Geography, Bucharest, Romania rsageata@gmail.com 50 1 Introduction Withthecollapseofideologicalbarriersattheendofthe1980s,deep-goingeconomicmutationstookplace in the former communist space. In Romania, transition from a central-based economy to a free-compe-titionsystem,destructuredtheeconomy,aneweconomicstructuresbeingputinstead.However,corruption andfailedprivatizationsmadeespeciallyindustrialunitsbankrupt,whicheventuallywereamongthefirst to disappear. A new space-dependency between production and consumption and new spatial poles that concentrated the population’s incomes would develop (Ianoș and Heller 2006). The main aim of the present study is to highlight changes in the urban space organization after the decline of industry and the development of commercial services which have re-balanced the territorial systemsdisturbedbyoversizedindustrializationundercommunism.Asaresult,largerural-urbanmigra­tionflowsgotmomentum,associatedwithafast-growinghousing-stockinthecity(GoodmanandMarshall 2013). This process, which could be labelled »quantitative urbanization«, evolved faster than »qualitative urbanization«,thatis,thedevelopmentofatechnical-buildingandservicesinfrastructure(Novotnę2016). The issues discussed in this paper highlight the relationships between territorial disparities, purchas­ingpowerandthelocationoffinancial-bankingandcommercialinvestmentsinRomania.Aftertheindustrial sector had collapsed, a services sector developed, these processes being characteristic of the former cen­tral-basedeconomiesinCentralandEasternEuropeafter1989(Brülhart,CarrereandRobert-Nicoud2018). Also, the logic behind big commercial investments and the social impact of promoting the services sec­tor through big commercial investments is discussed herein. Deindustrializationmeansreducingtheshareofindustryinacountry’seconomy,orinahumancom­munity. This is specific to the periods of transition, or of economic crises and affects both the industrial productionandpeople’slivesasrealwagesandthelivingstandardaredecliningandunemploymentisris­ing (Rita Sedita, De Noni and Pilotti 2017). Transition from an excessively industrialized economy to a free-competition system is marked by globalization, deindustrialization preceding the development of the services sector. The complex relations between deindustrialization and the emergence of the services sector, as well as their impact on urban space organization within the general context of globalization, is a topical issue of major interest for the Central- and East-European countries (Jacoby and Korkut 2015). The fall of the communist system and the elimination of ideological barriers created the premises for a closer connection among the urban systems in neighbouring countries (McFarlane 2006). Cities acted as polarization nuclei, redirecting human flows in the territory. And yet, urban development could not makeupforindustrialdeclineanditsdemographic,butespeciallysocialconsequences(Crescenzi,Pietrobelli and Rabellotti 2016). After four decades of forced industrialization associated with hypertrophic devel­opment, the Romanian urban system experienced a radical change, basically de-urbanization of the city population and city-life quality, the functional characteristics of cities undergoing essential modifications (Holmén 1997). Industry, which had been the main factor of urbanization, would be overcome by the services sector, a phenomenon specific mainly to the big cities. Thus, Romania’s capital-city and the regional metropo­lisesstrengthenedtheirpositionsofco-ordinationintheterritory(Ianoș,PumainandRacine2000;Bürkner and Totelecan 2018). Bigcitiestendedtoassumetheroleofcosmopolitecitiesduetoanincreasingethnicaldiversity,aswell as to the development of specialist services and the large-scale assimilation of consumption products of theglobalculturethatgobeyondculturalfrontiers(Stead,deVriesandTasan-Kok2015;Wikström,Jönsson andL’EspoirDecosta2016).Foodandfashionitemshavethegreatestimpactonthepopulation.Immigration toRomaniaofsomeArab,Turkish,andChinesecitizensdealingintrade,orhavingsmallindustrialenter­prises,thepresenceofforeigncitizensstudyinginthiscountry,thestaffofdiplomaticmissions,ofmultinational companies,orofnon-governmentorganizationskeptdiversifyingtheservicessector.So,Chinese,Lebanese, Italian,orGreekrestaurantswouldopen,asdidFrenchorGermanbakeries,African,Indian,Latin-American, or other artisanal shops (van Ham and Tammaru 2016). The ever-greater concentration of incomes in the country’s capital-city, or in large cities, stimulated the development of products and specialist services, profile commercial units cropping up, usually in big commercial centres of the mall and supermarket type. This would explain the importance of these units forspreadingtheitemsoftheglobalconsumeristcultureatlocallevel(BezinandMoizeau2017).Thelim-its of this type of localization lie presumably in the growing social segregation through the ever-wider gap between the population’s income and demand, so that access is restricted to some particular segments of users (Picard and Zenou 2018). Hence, new spatial polarizations, directly proportional to social and cul­turalsegregation,anddependentonthecapacityoftheRomanianurbansystemtotakeinglobalizingflows. Thus,thegrowingfinancialsegregationbetweentheurbanpopulation,asaresultofrestructuredeconomic activities, opens up the way to globalizing flows (Demetry, Thurk and Fine 2015). Even if the items of the global consumerist culture are easily penetrating at local level, the population’s access to them is still fair­ly limited. Global culture tends to combine with local culture grafted on poverty and lack of education. In view of it, the quality of urban life is degrading through the development of urban subcultures and the proliferation of organized crime (Cohen 2016). Studying the distribution of banking investments could be a starting-point for looking at the spatial distribution of other types of services, commercial ones, in particular. 2 Data collection and methods 2.1 Data-set Thepresentresearchreliesonfieldinvestigation,bibliographicalsourcesandquantitativeanalyses.Inthis way, correlations could be established between the analyzed elements and the statistical prognoses. Field investigations focused on current land-use practices in certain urban and peri-urban areas and their situation in the 1988-1989 period, the peak of socialist industrialization in Romania (Dumitrescu 2008). The differences found show the changes occurred in the organization of the urban and peri-urban area, as well as in the functional zoning of cities in the post-communist period of deindustrialization. Preferences in the distribution of commercial investments reveal the extent of socio-economic avail­ability both at country level and in each city. Assessing the situation meant estimating the distribution of financial-banking investments. To this end, the internet sites of the 38 commercial banks in our study-sample were accessed. Investment distribution was compared with the territorial disparities highlighted by the poverty-level indicators reported in official statistics. Collecting data on the territorial distribution of malls and supermarkets was made by consulting the internetsitesofthemainbigcommercialcentres.Acorrelationwasestablishedbetweentheterritorialdis­tributionofthesecentersandthefinancial-bankinginvestments,correspondingtothepopulation’spoverty level. Our analyses covered all mall-type commercial investments of rank 0, I and II cities, as well as the stores of the 25 chains of big European retailers located in these cities. 2.2 Research methods In order to get an insight into the changes of the urban space once industrial zones were turned into com­mercial and services zones, one should proceed by looking at the impact of the population’s financial segregation when commercial investments are made (Mermet 2017). So, the analysis of the spatial distri­butionofacharacteristicsampleof38commercialbanks,whichprovedtoberelativelystableintheRomanian capitalmarket,hasbeenmadebyabi-dimensionallinearregressionmodel,conceivedasacorrelationbetween the logic of financial-banking investment distribution area and commercial investments. What underlies the dependency of placing investments in the services sector is the perpetuation, in time, of path dependency (Isaksen and Jakobsen 2017). Once the logic of locating the main big investments was established, a correlation was made between thelocationofnewcommercialsitesandwhathadpreviouslyexistedinthoseareas.Inthisway,afewtypolo­giesofurbanandperi-urbanspatialreconversionwereoutlinedintermsofthedevelopmentofcommercial services. The impact of ethnical minorities on the physiognomy and functional particularities of commercial zones was analyzed as part of the process of large Romanian cities acquiring a cosmopolitan character. This phenomenon is ever more often met in Central and Eastern Europe. There is a close correlation between the territorial distribution of poverty (i.e. minimum guaranteed income, labour employment rate, purchasing power/inhabitant) (Paugam 1998), and the distribution of financial-banking and commercial investments. This distribution can be expressed by a bi-dimensional regression equation between the number of banking units and of commercial centres: y=a + bx, where x=number of banking units, y=number of commercial units and a = a point on the axis of com-mercialunitswhenthenumberofbankingunits=0andb=regressionslopespecifictotherelationbetween the two variables. BucharestisahypertrophiccityintheRomanianurbansystemandthecorrelationbetweenbothvari- ablesgivesawrongimageonterritorialdistribution.Thisexplainswhyitisnecessarytoanalyzetheurban system with and without Bucharest. Synthetically, the main methodological steps which define our approach were as follows: a) Highlighting the main territorial disparities in Romania; b) Correlating territorial disparities with the purchasing power and the placement of financial-banking and commercial investments; c) Analyzingthecorrelationbetweentheterritorialdistributionoffinancial-bankingandcommercialinvest­ments using the bilinear regression (with and without Bucharest); d) Defining the changes occurred within the urban space organization through deindustrialization and tertiarization,thedevelopmentofcommercialservicesandtheestablishmentofatypologytothiseffect; e) Evaluating the impact of big commercial investments on Romania’s cities. 3 Results and discussion 3.1 Territorial disparities in Romania: General remarks InordertobetterunderstandthelogicbehindlocatingnewcommercialinvestmentsinRomania,oneshould firstlook atthemaincharacteristicsoftheurbansystemandthemajorterritorialdisparities inthiscountry. The Romanian urban system (Figure 1) contains 320 towns (Mitrică, Grigorescu and Urucu 2016). Afour-rank hierarchy of towns had in view the economic and demographic polarization grade in the ter­ritory and the social-urbanism level. The first three ranks (0, I and II) include 93 urban centres (29% of all of Romania’s towns) with 8.6 million inhabitants (68.5%) of the urban population and ca. 43% of Romania’s total population. These are best representative for the urban system in this country. The poverty rate of the population is decisive for the purchasing power and the location of financial-banking and commercial investments. Territorial disparities show two poverty polarization areas: 1) in the east (Moldavia), extreme poverty (lack of means of daily subsistence) in the counties of Vaslui and Botoșani; 2) in the south, extreme poverty in Ialomița, Giurgiu and Teleorman counties. According to statistical data (2014), most poverty-prone people, running the risk of social exclusion, liveintheSouth-Eastdevelopmentregion(53.4%/totalpopulation),North-East(48.9%)andSouth-West (45.6%).Theseterritorialdisparitiesareconfirmedbythefollowinganalyzedindicators:percentageofpop­ulationreceivingaminimumguaranteedincome,labouremploymentlevel,andpurchasingpower/inhabitant In Romania, 1.1% of the population benefits from a guaranteed minimum (31.85 Euro/person) from the State budget; on average, most socially-assisted people live in the east (Vaslui County – 2.7%) and south (Teleorman and Mehedinți counties – 2.4% each; Buzău and Dolj counties – 2.2% each). Labour employ­ment level in Romania: 59.8% of the total active population (15–64-year olds) in 2016, minimum values being recorded again in the eastern and southern counties. Disparities are also shown by the purchasing power index: the poorest counties lying in the east and south (Vaslui: 3,054 Euro/inhabitant) (Figure 2). Figure 1:The urban system in Romania. p p. 54 Figure 2: Purchasing power and banking unit density in Romania (2016). p p. 55 Legend: Development regions: BUCHAREST Capital city – – I.North EastU k r a i n e Dorohoi Municipalites– II.South East – IAȘI county seats, – (regional metropolises) III.South11 Rădăuți Boto ani ș Maramureș SATU IV. Bucharest–Ilfov V.South West – VI.West VII.Centre VIII. North West – Carei BAIA MARE BOTO ANI Ș MARE Câmpulung SUCEAVA Satu Mare Municipalites– Moldovenesc Fălticeni Suceava SUCEAVA county seats – Vatra Dornei VIII. Iași Bistri a­ ț Marghita Pașcani S laj ă N ăăs ud Dej BISTRI A ZAL UȚ PIATRA-IAȘI Ă ORADEA NEAMȚ Roman Gherla Bihor Vaslui– County Salonta Toplița I. Câmpina Municipalites Towns Reghin CLUJ-Cluj Neamț Rank 0 Mureș BeiușHuși SIBIU Orăștie Codlea Lugoj 6 GHEORGHE Gala iț Gheorgheni Rank I NAPOCA 10 TÂRGU MUREȘ I VIII – DevelopmentTurda – Harghita MoineștiVASLUI regions BAC UVaslui MIERCUREAĂ Rank II Târnăveni CIUC Bacău Aiud Arad Bârlad Onești Blaj 8 ARAD Rank III Alba 9 ALBAMediaș Brad IULIA VII. Adjud 7 DEVACovasnaTecuci Republic of Sebeș Sibiu F g raș ăă Timiș SFÂNTU VranceaMoldova TIMI OARA Ș ș BRA OVȘ Bra ov FOC ANI Ș Hunedoara GALAȚI Râmnicu Ukraine Săcele VI. Caransebeș Lupeni 5 Sărat 4 CâmpulungII. Buzău ȘȚA Ă Cara ș -1 Argeș Vâlcea Argeș Moreni Prahova BUZ UĂ Brăila Tulcea RE ICurtea deCâmpina BR ILATULCEA Severin 2 PITE TI GorjȘț PLOIE TI Ș Motru Drăgășani Dâmbovi a Orșova TÂRGOVI TEUrziceni Ș Ilfov 3 Ialomi a ț SLOBOZIA Mehedin iț Fetești IV. Black V. III.BUCHAREST Sea RÂMNICU VÂLCEA, TÂRGU JIU, 1. 2. SLATINA C l raiș 3. DROBETA - TURNU SEVERIN, 4. Vulcan, Dolj ăă C L RAI ĂĂ Ș Olt 3 Petro ani, 5. ș 6. Hunedoara, 7. Târgu Secuiesc,CRAIOVA Medgidia CONSTANȚA Teleorman Oltenița Giurgiu 8. Odorheiu Secuiesc, 9. ș 10. Câmpia Turzii,Caracal RoșioriConstan a Sighi oara, ț de VedeGIURGIU Băilești 11. Sighetu Marma iei. ț Calafat ALEXANDRIA Mangalia Turnu Măgurele Content and map by: Radu S geatăă , 0 20 40 60 kmB u l g a r i a © 2018 Romanian Academy, Institute of Geography 3.2 Purchasing power, financial-banking and commercial investments The logic of making financial-banking and commercial investments lies at the base of the territorial dis­parities of the population’s purchasing power. An analysis of the 38 commercial banks reveals their clear-cut concentration in the urban area, with one exception (CEC Bank). Another characteristic feature of the Romanian banking system is the pyra­midal distribution of banking units, most of them located in Bucharest (19% of all) and in rank I and II cities,regionalandcountypolarizationnuclei,whichalsohavethebestservicescoverage/inhabitant.Small, especiallyone-industrytowns,ortownssituatedinhigh-povertyareasandoccupationaldependency,with little financial-banking investments, make the population dependent on the services offered only by cer-tainbanks,whichimplicitlyhavetheregionalmonopole.Thebestcoverageofbankingservicesunits(positive externalities) is in Bucharest, as well as in some large cities from the west of Romania, and in Constanța (aBlackSeaportandtouristcity).Here,thereisagoodcorrelationbetweenincomedistributionandpeo­ple’s purchasing power. At the other endofthe spectrum (negative externalities) stand the poor countries intheeast(especiallyVasluiandBotoșani)andinthesouth-east(Călărași,Ialomița,GiurgiuandTeleorman) (Mitrică et al. 2017). Thereisanobviouspath-dependencybetweentheterritorialdistributionofthepurchasingpowerand ofbankingservices,visibleinthepopulationdensity/bankingunit.Positiveanomaliesrecordedsomecities inwhichtheindustrialdeclinecouldbecompensatedforbytourism(e.g.Constanța,PiatraNeamț),enabling the employment of the industry-released labour surplus, or by some cities that have a good geographical position versus the big communication axes (e.g. Suceava). At the other end of the spectrum one finds negativeanomalieswhichlargelyaffecttheiron-and-steelindustrycentres(Galați,Hunedoara,Reșița,Călărași and Târgoviște) and the mining ones (Petroșani and Motru), in which the process of economic reconver­sion, generated unemployment and a low purchasing power, or towns located in the neighbourhood of some regional metropolis (Săcele), where the labour force is taken in by the city (Brașov) (Figure 2). Thesamepyramidaldistributionoffinancialinvestmentsholdsalsoforcommercialunits,theextentof investments being directly proportional to town-size. Big commercial units are frequently opened in large regionalpolarizationcitieswithapositiveeconomicdynamic,offeringafairlycompetitivefinancialmarket thatensuresprofitability.Commercialinvestmentsmadeintownssituatedatthelowerendoftheurbanhier­archy(under30,000inhabitatnts)aremostlyofthesmallsupermarkettype,becausemakingbigcommercial investments insuch townsisnot profitable. IntheterritoryofRomania, the east/west financialsegregation isthedirectreflectionofcommercialservices,too;bigcommercialinvestmentsareattractedmainlybyBucharest, Constanța and the large cities in Banat and Transylvania (Timișoara, Arad, Oradea and Cluj-Napoca). Analyzing this regression equation for the 93 urban-rank centres 0, I and II, yielded a 0.85 correla­tion coefficient which confirms the close correlation among these variables. This strong correlation is the result of the high hypertrophic character of the Capital-city (H index is 5.8) within the Romanian urban system. If Bucharest were excluded, this coefficient would be equal to 0.67, which shows a weaker, yet sig­nificant, correlation (R2=0.45). 3.3 The spatial impact of commercial investments on urban areas The first malls in Romania were opened by changing the destination of some buildings designed (in the years of the centralized economy) to host big food stores. In the second stage, the policy of centralized industrializationfocussedonthebuildingoflargeagro-foodandpublicfoodunitswithinindustrialareas, or on their boundary with dwelling quarters to enable the workers’ rapid access to these services and thus reduce meals-and-shopping breaks. In 1990, these constructions were abandoned; later on, they would be taken over by foreign investors who turned them into mall-type centres (all in Bucharest). Since urban developmentpolicieshadinviewdevelopingindustrialandresidentialareas(totakeinindustry-employed migration flows), locating big commercial and services units inside these areas to make up for a shortage of commercial and services facilities. Investments proved profitable and contributed to diminishing peo­ple’s migration from the city-centre to the periphery (Shertzer, Twinam and Walsh 2018). Figure 3: Typology of localizing commercial investments in Romania. p Legend: Inhabitants Count i es w here no (cens. 2011) A 1 new ma l was b ui l t 2 000 000 2 btwe n 1990 a nd 2016 350 000 300 000 U k r a i n e 200 000 3 B ALBA – County nameDorohoi100 000 50 000 430 000 Satu Mare Arad –County-seat nameRd ă u iăț Sighetu Marma iei ț Boto ș ani 4.1 Motru –City/Town name Suceava SATU MARE MARAMURE Ș BTO ANI Ș Carei 4.2CâmpulungMoldovenesc Ba ia Mare SUCEA VA F lticeni ă 5 Bis tria ț IA ȘI S Ă LAJ Vatra Dornei Pa cani ș Commer cil Pa rks NEAM Ț Dej Orad ea BISTRI Ț A­ I ai ș Zal u ă Ma l ls Gherla ț N Ă S Ă UD Topli a Piatra- Roman CLUJ Su perma rkets Neam ț BIHOR Reghin C l u j- Acta geographica Slovenica, 60-1, 2020 BAC U Ă Bârlad F ocani ș Hu iș MURE Ș Npo c a Gheorgheni Vaslui Turda Târgu Bac ău HARGHITA Mure ș V A S L UI Odorheiu Mi rcure a ARAD Secuiesc Moine ti ș AiudTârn ă veni Ci uc ARAD ALBA Blaj Ar ad Al b a One ti ș Brad Sighișoara Iu li 57 aDe Mediaș COVASNA Târgu va BRA OV Ș Secuiesc Sebeș SIBIU T imi o ș ra Sfntuâ Tecuci VRANCEA Orăștie Gorghe F ă g ă raș Lugoj GALA ȚI Sibiu TIMI Ș Bra ș ov U k r a i n e S cele ă Hunedoara Gla i ț HUNEDOARA R mnicu â S ă rat Petro ani ș CâmpulungCaransebeș BUZ ĂU PRAHOVA Br ă ila R mni c uâ Curtea de Reia ș ț T rgu Ji u â Argeș V l c ea â T ulc e a CARA Ș -SEVERIN ARGE Ș B RILA Ă uz u ă Moreni Câmpina ÂLCEA V GORJ Motru Orșova Dr TULCEA Pl oet ș i ă g ăș ani P et i ș Trgo vi t e â ș ILFOV Urziceni Slob ozi a Dr ob e ta- IALOMI ȚA Fete ti T urn u Sv e rin ș B l a c k MEHEDIN ȚI S e a Slatina Bu cha r est Medgidia C ăă l ra ș i 3 CLRA I Ă Ș OLT GIUR Olteni a ț DOLJ Ro iori de Vede ș CONS TAN A Ț GIU Caracal C rai ova Constan ța TELEORMAN Giurgiu Al Calafat e xandria Mangalia Turnu M gurele ă Content and map by: Radu S geatăă 0 20 40 60 km , © 2018 Romanian Academy, Institute of Geography B u l g a r i a Other big commercial investments were placed on farmland on the outskirts of cities, or on the ter­rainsofsomeformerindustrialunits(thathadbeendemolished),usingtheavailablerail-and-roadfacilities (Mirea2011).Herearesomeexamplesofformerindustrialzonesturnedcommercial:inBucharest(Miorița milk factory, Electric Machine Plant, Semănătoarea), Craiova (Electroputere), Timișoara (former slaugh­terhouse), Brașov (former rubber items and agricultural equipment factories), etc. There are many other situations of big investments localized on the territory of some communes that lieintheproximityoflargecities,wherelandpriceislower.Theadvantagesofferedbyeasyaccessaccount for the development of peri-urban commercial parks: in the proximity of Bucharest, on the motorways to Ploiești, to Pitești and to Urziceni; near Sibiu, on the motorway to Bucharest; close to Ploiești, on the highway to Brașov; Constanța (to Mangalia); Brașov (to Ploiești and Bucharest); Galați (to Brăila); Pitești (on the motorway to Bucharest), etc. Another tendency is to update the big commercial units, built before 1989 in county-seats, and turn them into malls. For example, the big universal store Unirea in Bucharest, updated and turned into mall-type centre. In some 1st and 2nd-rank cities, they built commercial units in the central parts of the city, or of big residential areas (Figure 3). Some commercial complexes are located in the proximity of large student camps. In Bucharest, a typ­icalexampleisCarrefourOrhideeasitedintheclosevicinityoftheRegie-Grozăveștistudentcamp;similar examples in Cluj-Napoca and Iași. The same location pattern holds for entertainment services comple­mentary to the shopping ones. 3.4 The social impact of commercial investments. The Romanian city from traditional to cosmopolitan Whetherlocatedontheoutskirtsoflargecities,orwithintheircentralsections,ofgreatdemographiccon-centration,theimpactofbigcommercialinvestmentsisworthconsidering.The»mall«concepttranscends a strictly commercial function, it being associated with luxury and fashionable; one goes to the mall to seenewtrends,tosocialize,tobecomeacquaintedwithacertainsegmentofthepopulation(Skivko2016). So, financial segregation goes hand-in-hand with social segregation, both being embodied in commercial segregation, and the best way of expressing it is going to the mall. No wonder, therefore, that in some big commercial centers, commercial facilities are associated with social and business facilities (in Timișoara, Bucharest, etc.). Apartfromfashiongarments,cosmetics,orelectricitems,mallshavefast-foodrestaurants,coffee-bars, cinemas, casinos, entertainment areas, destined to disseminate global consumer products within the Romanian urban society. Looking at the number of visitors going to these places, the social function of malls is quite obvious. At the same time, the global character of this commercial type is reflected in the countriestheseproductsoriginatefrom,theybeingsoldbyover90%ofthecommercialnetworkinRomania. Incomes are concentrated in Bucharest and in the large cities; this determined specialist goods and servicestobeconcentratedinbigcommercialcomplexes.Theirlocationappearstobeconnectedwithever-greater social segregation, tending to delimit the areas where such goods and services can be distributed, that is, areas in which a certain type of users can be found. Thus, a new kind of urban-rural polarization emerged, directly proportional to social and cultural segregation, which depends on the Romanian urban system’s capacity to take in globalizing flows. The deep-going financial disparities among the urban population, caused by industrial restructuring, filter the penetration of globalizing flows. On the other hand, the global consumerist culture, combined with endemic poverty-induced lack of culture, is a fertile ground for the resurgence of urban subcultures andorganizedcrime.ThisphenomenonisincreasinglyaffectingRomania’stowns,andespeciallythelarge cities (Ban 2014). 4 Conclusion Developing the commercial services sector has become one of the main characteristics of the Romanian economy after 1989, in line with evolution trends in the global economy. Changes in the urban functional zone have been made as commercial and services areas kept replacing the industrial ones. The density of modern commercial areas goes hand-in-hand with the financial-banking investments, and is directly proportional to the population’s state of well-being. In Romania, the commercial area out­side Capital-city is 2,43 million m2(density: 184 m2/1,000 inh.) and of 1.19 million m2 in Bucharest City (651m2/1,000 inh.) (C&W Echinox 2018). Bigcommercialinvestmentshavebeenmadeonthesiteofformerindustrialunitsthathadbeendemol­ished (Cercleux, Peptenatu and Merciu 2015), or on some former production spaces, former farm lands located on the outskirts of large cities, or in peri-urban zones (using existing road access), in some resi­dential areas short of services facilities, or in the proximity of some student camps. TheglobaleconomicandfinancialcrisishadaseriousimpactoncommercialinvestmentsinRomania, theinvestment-marketbecomingsaturatedaspeople’spurchasingpowerdropped.Someprojectswereaban­doned for lack of investors (e.g. in Craiova, Buzău, Constanța and Bucharest), others were turned into office-rooms, or residential areas. Globalization, through big investments in commercial and agreement areas has materialized in that over90%areheldbyinternationalstorechainsinRomania’scommercialstructure.Thiscountryisamong the European states with the fastest economic dynamics in this field. 5 References Ban, C. 2014: Beyond anticomunism. The fragility of class analysis in Romania. East European Politics and Societies 29-3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0888325415599197 Bezin, E., Moizeau, F. 2017: Cultural dynamics, social mobility and urban segregation. Journal of Urban Economics 99. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jue.2017.02.004 Brülhart,M.,Carrere,C.,Robert-Nicoud,F. 2018:Tradeandtowns:Heterogeneousadjustmenttoaborder shock. Journal of Urban Economics 105. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jue.2017.09.005 Bürkner,H-J.,Totelecan,S.G.2018:Assemblagesofurbanleisurecultureininner-cityBucharest.International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 42-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.12630 Cercleux, A-L., Peptenatu, D., Merciu, F-C. 2015: Structural dynamics of tertiary activities in industrial parksinBucharest,Romania.ActaGeographicaSlovenica55-2.DOI:http://doi.org/10.3986/AGS.753 Cohen,J-N.2016:ThemythofAmerica’s»cultureofconsumerism«:PolicymayhelpdriveAmericanhouse­hold’sfrayingfinances.JournalofConsumerCulture16-2.DOI:https://doi.org/10.1177/1469540514528196 Crescenzi, R., Pietrobelli, C., Rabellotti, R. 2016: Regional strategic assets and the location strategies of emerging countries’ multinationals in Europe. European Planning Studies 24-4. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.1080/09654313.2015.1129395 C&W Echinox 2018. Internet: https://www.agendaconstructiilor.ro/files/oportunitati-comunicate/Cresc livrările de spații comerciale până la sfârșitul anului 2018 (16. 1. 2019) Demetry,D.,Thurk,J.,Fine,G.A.2015:Strategicpoverty:Howsocialandculturalcapitalshapeslow-income life. Journal of Consumer Culture 15-1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1469540513493205 Dumitrescu,B.2008:OrașelemonoindustrialedinRomâniaîntreindustrializareforțatășideclineconomic. Bucharest. Goodman, J., Marshall, J. P. 2013: Crisis, movement and management in contemporary globalizations. Globalizations 10-3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14747731.2013.793896 Holmén,H.1997:Limitstoglobalization.EuropeanReview5-1.DOI:https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1234­ 981X(199701)5:1%3C75::AID-EURO151%3E3.0.CO;2-W Ianoș, I., Heller, W. 2006: Spațiu, economie și sisteme de așezări. Bucharest. Ianoș, I., Pumain, D., Racine, J. B. (eds.) 2000: Integrated urban systems and sustainability of urban life. Bucharest. Isaksen,A.,Jakobsen,S-E.2017:Newpathdevelopmentbetweeninnovationsystemsandindividualactors. European Planning Studies 25-3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2016.1268570 Jakoby,W.,Korkut,W.2015:Vulnerabilityandeconomicre-orientation.RhetoricandrealityinHungary’s »Chinese Opening«. East-European Politics and Societies 30-3. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/ 0888325415604355 McFarlane,C.2006:Transnationaldevelopmentnetworks:bringingdevelopmentandpostcolonialapproaches intodialogue.TheGeographicalJournal172-1.DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4959.2006.00178.x Mermet, A-C. 2017: Global retail capital and the city: towards an intensification of gentrification. Urban Geography 38-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2016.1200328 Mirea, D-A. 2011: Industrial landscape – a landscape in transition in the Municipality Area of Bucharest. Geographical Phorum – Geographical Studies and Environment Protection Research X-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5775/fg.2067-4635.2011.014.d Mitrică, B., Grigorescu, I., Urucu, V 2016: Dezvoltarea urbană și ariile metropolitane. România – natură și societate, Bucharest. Mitrică, B., Mocanu, I., Dumitrașcu, M., Grigorescu, I. 2017: Socio-economic disparities in the devel­opment of Romania’s border areas. Social Indicators Research 134-3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11205-016-1462-7 Novotnę, L. 2016: Urban development and migration processes in the urban region of Bratislava from the post-socialist transformation until the global economic crisis. Urban Geography 37-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2016.1139413 Paugam,S.1998:Lesformescontemporainesdelapauvretéetdel’exclusion.Lepointdevuesociologique. Geneses. Femme, Famille, Individu 31. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3406/genes.1998.1516 Picard, P. M., Zenou, Y. 2018: Urban spatial structure, employment and social ties. Journal of Urban Economics 104. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jue.2018.01.004 Rita Sedita, S., De Noni, I., Pilotti, L. 2017: Out of the crisis: an empirical investigation of place-specific determinants of economic resilience. European Planning Studies 25-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/ 09654313.2016.1261804 Shertzer,A.,Twinam,T.,Walsh,R.P.2018:Zoningandtheeconomicgeographyofcities.JournalofUrban Economics 10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jue.2018.01.006 Skivko, M. 2016: Touring the fashion: Branding the city. Journal of Consumer Culture 16-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1469540516635806 Stead, D., de Vries, J., Tasan-Kok, T. 2015: Planning cultures and histories: Influences on the evolution of planning system and spatial development patterns. European Planning Studies 23-11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2015.1016402 vanHam,M.,Tammaru,T.2016:Newperspectivesonethnicsegregationovertimeandspace.Adomains approach. Urban Geography 37-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2016.1142152 Wikström,S.,Jönsson, H.,L’EspoirDecosta,P.2016:Aclashofmodernities:Developinganewvalue-based framework to understand the mismatch between production and consumption. Journal of Consumer Culture 16-3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1469540514528197