An insight into the actual socio-economic situation of Romania

Approximately half of the population experiences some degree of poverty while 10% live in extreme poverty (according to a report made by the Ministry of Labor, Social Solidarity and Family - MLSSF). This poverty has grown rapidly over the transition decade. Real wages, already amongst the lowest in Europe (including Central and Eastern Europe) in 1990, have since declined by approximately half. A high proportion of households, mostly those in rural areas, are engaged in informal economic activity such as small-scale farming, and it is estimated that at least one third of household incomes are in kind. High levels of poverty in the country tend to be associated with families of more than three children. The only ethnic group with a markedly distinct level of poverty is the Roma, who collectively experience 3.5 times the average poverty rate. Poverty appears to be up to half as prevalent again in rural areas (where over 45 % of the population live) compared to the urban areas, as there is also some regional concentration, often associated with declining of industrial activity.

Anomic Crime in Post-Welfarist Societies. Cult of the Individual, Integration Patterns and Delinquency

Post-Fordist economies come along with post-welfarist societies marked by intensified cultural individualism and increased structural inequalities. These conditions are commonly held to be conducive to relative deprivation and, thereby, anomic crime. At the same time, post-welfarist societies develop a new ‘balance of power’ between institutions providing for welfare regulation, such as the family, the state and the (labour) market – and also the penal system. These institutions are generally expected to improve social integration, ensure conformity and thus reduce anomic crime. Combining both perspectives, we analyse the effects of moral individualism, social inequality, and different integration strategies on crime rates in contemporary societies through the lenses of anomie theory. To test our hypotheses, we draw on time-series cross-section data compiled from different data sources (OECD, UN, WHO, WDI) for twenty developed countries in the period 1970-2004, and run multiple regressions that control for country-specific effects. Although we find some evidence that the mismatch between cultural ideal (individual inclusion) and structural reality (stratified exclusion) increases the anomic pressure, whereas conservative (i. e. family-based), social-democratic (i. e. state-based) and liberal (i. e. market-based) integration strategies to a certain extent prove effective in controlling the incidence of crime, the results are not very robust. Moreover, reservations have to be made regarding the effects of “market” income inequality as well as familialist, unionist and liberalist employment policies that are shown to have reversed effects in our sample: the former reducing, the latter occasionally increasing anomic crime. As expected, the mismatch between cultural ideal (individual inclusion) and structural reality (stratified exclusion) increases the anomic pressure, whereas conservative (i. e. family-based), social-democratic (i. e. state-based) and liberal (i. e. market-based) integration strategies generally prove effective in controlling the incidence of crime. Nevertheless, we conclude that the new cult of the individual undermines the effectiveness of conservative and social-democratic integration strategies and drives societies towards more “liberal” regimes that build on incentive as well as punitive elements.