Geography of Tourism in Romania

Abstract

The “Carpathic-Danubian-Pontic” geography of Romania is completed and defined by the personality of the Carpathian Mountains, the Danube Delta and Valley and the Black Sea, all these units in a nearly symmetrical combination with the hills and plains, determined by the steplike arrangement of the relief. A situation marked by originality and specificity is the tourist system formed of the Black Sea and the Danube Delta. On the backdrop of an exceptional natural environment human resources consisting of archaeological sites, historical buildings, architectural and art establishments, museums and memorial houses, testimonies of civilization and popular culture through elements of ethnography, the villages and tourist resorts boost the tourist valences of these areas facilitating the outline and development of a wide range of forms of tourism: leisure and health, hunting, rural, cultural, scientific, mountain etc. The tourist infrastructures are elements which support the tourist phenomena in reception areas and include hotels and motels, tourist villas and bungalows, touristic and agro-touristic boarding houses, ships and accommodation space. To these are added roads, railways, airports and waterways to connect important touristic regions and the main types of tourism: rural, mountain, leisure, health, cruise of the Danube, hunting and fishing, etc. The tourist regionalization of the Romanian territory, using as landmarks the value of the tourist potential and tourism infrastructure, outlined 32 regions which involve the capitalization and promotion of the natural and human heritage as an essential resource for tourism development in Romania.

These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

9.1 Introduction

Romania’s integration into the EU political space involves also the capitalization and promotion of the natural and human heritage as an essential resource for tourism development in Romania. Identifying, assessing, quantifying, mapping, integrating and promoting the authentic and traditional natural and anthropic heritage within a sustainable development strategy with an international character (Timothy and Boyd 2003) represent absolutely necessary steps in this new favourable context of “cultural levelling” specific to globalization (Ilieş et al. 2011a). On the backdrop of the European integration, the Romanian space, where the genuine cultural heritage features include priceless values, difficult to quantify, therefore their inventory, the qualitative re-assessment and the set-up of in situ conservation models emerge as necessary measures to prevent them from the danger of extinction or a conversion into the trendy-imported “kitsch” (Ilieş et al. 2009). The Romanian space is still full of authenticity and tradition in rural areas (Ilieş et al. 2008), and on the backdrop of an appropriate natural setting, the people must be accountable and motivated to maintain the customs and the specificity that characterizes it. A scientific approach focused on such a direction may materialize through quantitative and qualitative knowledge of what is authentic, traditional and representative of the Romanian space and especially for those areas devoted to preserving ethnographic traditions and authentic values such as the “lands” (Cocean 1997a; Ilieş 1999a, b; Ilieş et al. 1998; Cocean and Ciangă 2000; Cocean 2011; Fig. 9.1) in the regions of Maramureș, Crișana, Transylvania, sub-Carpathian Hills, etc.

Fig. 9.1

Romania. Natural landscape, tourist resorts and principal areas with concentration of tourist resources (Source Law 190/2009—Planul de Amenajare a Teritoriului Naţional (PATN)—Secţiunea a VIII-a, Zone turistice; www.mdrl.ro; Romanian National Institute of Statistics, 2015; www.insee.ro, 2015)

Fig. 9.2

Romania. Protected areas: biosphere reserves and national and natural parks with the concentration of accommodation units and estimated number of visitors (2008) (Source National Agency for Environment Protection; Law 5/2000—Planul de Amenajare a Teritoriului Naţional (PATN)—Secţiunea a III-a, Zone protejate; www.mdrl.ro, 2008; Romanian National Institute of Statistics; www.insee.ro, 2015)

Fig. 9.3

Romania. The main cultural and natural tourist resources (Source Master Planul 2007–2026, pp. 18, 19, 23; www.mdrl.ro; Romanian National Institute of Statistics, 2015; www.cimec.ro/Monumente/UNESCO/UNESCOen/indexRealiz.htm, 2015)

Fig. 9.4

Romania. Evolution of tourist accommodation establishments by types (1990–2012) (Source Romanian National Institute of Statistics, 2012; www.insee.ro, 2014)

Fig. 9.5

Romania. Characteristics of touristic accommodation establishments by number of units, tourists and overnight stays (1990–2012) (Source Romanian National Institute of Statistics, 2014; www.insee.ro, 2014)

Fig. 9.6

Romania. Touristic accommodation capacity by types of establishments in 2008 and 2012 (Source www.insee.ro, 2008, 2012)

Fig. 9.7

Romania. Establishments of tourist reception with functions of tourist accommodation by counties, on 2012 (Source Romanian National Institute of Statistics; www.insee.ro)

Fig. 9.8

Romania. Evolution of tourist accommodation capacity and indices of net using (by total and by hotels and motels) in the period 1990–2012 (Source Romanian National Institute of Statistics, 2014; www.insee.ro, 2014)

Fig. 9.9

Romania. Tourist accommodation capacity and indices of net using of capacity operation by counties, in 2012 (Source Romanian National Institute of Statistics, 2012; www.insee.ro)

Fig. 9.10

Tourist accommodation capacity, capacity in operation, accommodation units, overnight stays and tourists’ number in 2012 by tourist destination in 2012 by tourist (Source Romanian National Institute of Statistics, 2012; www.insee.ro)

Fig. 9.11

Characteristics of tourist accommodation establishments, in 2012 by tourist destination (Source Romanian National Institute of Statistics, 2012; www.insee.ro)

Fig. 9.12

Romania. The tourist movement considering the number of arrivals (Romanians and foreigners) in tourist accommodation in the period 1990–2014 (Data sources: Romanian National Institute of Statistics, 2014; www.insee.ro)

Fig. 9.13

Romania. The main tourist destinations according to the number of arrivals in 1994–2012 (Sources Romanian National Institute of Statistics, 2012; www.insee.ro)

Fig. 9.14

Romania. The main tourist destinations according to the number of foreigners and Romanian arrivals in 2012 (Source Romanian National Institute of Statistics, 2012; www.insee.ro)

Fig. 9.15

Romania. The main tourist destinations according to the number of arrivals by counties in 2012 (Source Romanian National Institute of Statistics, 2012; www.insee.ro)

Fig. 9.16

Tourist movement according to official registration at tourist destination areas (Source Ilieş et al. 2011b, p. 239)

Fig. 9.17

Romania. The tourist movement considering the number of arrivals of foreign tourists: total number, with and without official tourist accommodation in the period 1990–2012 (Source Romanian National Institute of Statistics, 2012; www.insee.ro)

Fig. 9.18

Arrivals of foreign visitors in Romania, by main origin countries (2007–2012) (Source Romanian National Institute of Statistics, 2007–2012; www.insee.ro)

Fig. 9.19

Total arrivals of foreign visitors in Romania, by means of transport used in 1990, 2000, 2008 and 2014 (Source Romanian National Institute of Statistics, 2010–2014; www.insee.ro)

Fig. 9.20

Romanian borders and cross-border points typology and territorial distribution (2014) (Source Romanian Police Guard; www.politiadefrontiera.ro, 2015; www.insee.ro, 2015)

Fig. 9.21

Romania. Major tourist regions, “the lands” and major type of tourism by region (Source Ilieş 1999; Cocean et al. 2002, p. 297)

The “Carpathic-Danubian-Pontic” geography of Romania is completed and defined by the personality of the Carpathian Mountains, the Danube Delta and Valley and the Black Sea, all these units in a nearly symmetrical combination with the hills and plains, determined by the steplike arrangement of the relief. The mountains, hills and plains blend harmoniously in fairly equal proportions (about 33% each) on an area of 238,391 km². Taken individually on one hand, and by association on the other hand, they generate a landscape variety and complexity caused by the presence of the structural relief and its petrography, whose genetic typology identifies with the existence of the volcanic, glacial, karst, wind, river and sea type. In the south-east of the country, the Danube Delta, Europe’s newest territory, stands out by its unique attributes related to the landscape, morphohydrology and fauna coming to the forefront through diversity and wealth. Together with the Black Sea, the Danube Delta forms a territorial system with a leading eco-tourism function and a unique character. The position of the Carpathian Mountains in the central part of the country conditions the hydrographical component through an extensive river network directly or indirectly tributary to the Danube, “directing them” like a water castle across the entire territory. To these are added an impressive number and a genetic variety of natural and man-made lakes, completed by a large number of mineral and thermal springs.

Romania in the European context is situated at the confluence and interference of great European cultures and civilizations, in the contact zone between the two great branches of the Christian Church, i.e. the Orthodox and Catholic one, in this context giving Europe a wooden and stone architecture of exceptional value. The hilly and depression areas, the meadows, the river valleys and the mountain area up to over 1000 m altitude have always offered favourable conditions for the human activity and the set-up of new settlements. The archaeological excavations and accidental discoveries have brought to light the traces of culture and civilization of ancient times. The models of political and military organization across time have given birth to the “lands” (Fig. 9.1), genuine “oases” of cultural and ethnographic identity which, at present, stand out as the most important areas preserving the tangible and intangible man-made heritage (Cocean 2011). However, in a complex and diversified natural background, all these represent a substantial category of man-made tourist resources belonging to the material civilization such as historical sites, monuments of art and architecture, and historic and sociocultural sites, filled with the spiritual ones such as customs, folklore, religion, organization and settlement habits with a local specificity.

9.2 Natural and Cultural Tourist Resources

The spatial distribution of tourism resources, the quantitative and qualitative differences, the capitalization degree and tourist planning (Hall 2008) under the shape of some functional tourist territorial systems in Romania (Ianoş 2000; Cocean 2005; Ilieş et al. 2012) have led to a differentiated process of touristification (Cazelais et al. 2000), materialized by a tourist zoning (Cocean 1997b; Cândea et al. 2000; Cocean et al. 2002; Dinu 2002; Cândea et al. 2003; Muntele and Iaţu 2003; Ciangă 2006; Surd 2008; etc.) very useful for the practice of tourist planning (Hall 2008; Haughton et al. 2010) and organization of the geographical tourist space (Williams 1998; Erdeli and Gheorghilaş 2006; Ciangă and Dezsi 2007; Ilieş 2007c; Timothy and Nyaupane 2009; Ilieș et al. 2014). The literature on tourism zoning of the Romanian space abounds in examples and methods used in this sense (Ciangă 1998; Cocean et al. 2002; Cândea et al. 2003; Ciangă 2006; Hall 2008; etc.) and whose basis relies on the quantitative and qualitative characteristics of the tourism potential (resources and infrastructure). An important document for the development of Romanian tourism is the Master Plan for Romania’s National Tourism 2007–2026 prepared under the auspices of the World Tourism Organization, proposed and implemented by the Government of Romania with an immediate objective aimed at the “formulation of a generic framework for the sustainable development and management policies of the tourism industry in terms of natural and cultural resources for the long-term tourism development (2007–2026)” (Master Plan 2007, p. 2).

The general architecture of the Romanian landscape through the placing of the Carpathian arch in the centre of the country, bordered sideways by relief forms whose altitude reduces gradually results in a plurality of spatial relationships that facilitate the tourist flow and thus enhances the tourism phenomenon throughout its complexity. The further development of tourism and the introduction of new areas within its sphere of operation by the multiplication and diversification of the supply, amid a political opening of the Central and Eastern Europe, makes Romania join the category of countries with large perspectives in this direction. The structure of Romanian tourism stock stands out by the extremely diverse structural component, by the territorial identification of most elements generating motivation for the emergence, planning and development of tourism activities.

The mountainous potential results from its extension (about 30% of the country’s territory), the morphological diversity and the lithological complexity, with altitudes over 2000 m (23 representative peaks; Table 9.1; Fig. 9.1). The longest volcanic chain of Europe is located on Romania’s territory, in the Eastern Carpathians and formed by the Oaş-Gutâi-Ţibleş Mountains in the north and the Călimani Mountains (Pietrosu Peak 2100 m)-Gurghiu-Hargita in the centre, with altitudes ranging between 1400 and 2100 m. The grandeur of the Romanian mountain space is given by the frequency of crystalline structures that stand in the Southern Carpathians (Table 9.1): the Făgăraş Mountains (Moldoveanu 2544 m and Negoiu 2535 m peaks;), the Bucegi (Omu Peak 2505 m;), the Parâng (Parângul Mare Peak 2519 m), the Retezat (Peleaga Peak 2509 m; Retezat 2482 m); the Iezer (Iezeru Mare 2462 m) and the Rodnei Mountains (Pietrosu Peak 2303 m) in the Eastern Carpathians. All these underlie a diversified mountain relief and completed by the sedimentary structures composed of limestone, conglomerate, sandstone, marl, etc., modelled by the polyvalent action of morphogenetic agents which have generated a wide range of macro- and microforms with remarkable tourist valences, despite their unremarkable altitudes. The sedimentary structures stand through the territorial extension of the limestone massifs form the Piatra Craiului Mountains (La Om Peak 2238 m) and other soluble rocks (salt and gypsum) that favoured the inventory of over 12,500 caves, of which 145 have an exceptionally attractive value by their underground assets (Cocean 1997b, p. 22) which consists of speleothems, cavernament size and special physiognomy (the Bears’ Cave, Muierii, Vântului, Cloşani, Piatra Altarului, etc.), palaeontological and archaeological remains (Ciuculat), underground climate with curative properties, rivers, lakes and waterfalls and fossil glaciers (Scărişoara, Focul Viu (Live Fire), Vârtop, etc.). Of these, 14 may be considered touristic by adjusting them to the visitors’ access and where 300,000 visits were recorded annually (Master Plan 2007, p. 17). The Bears’ Cave and the Dâmbovicioara Cave receive about 50,000–70,000 visitors annually, the two being the best in terms of equipment (Master Plan 2007, p. 17). The attractive value of nature is complemented by the presence of fossil outcrops and special geological structures: limestone klipp (Mount Vulcan), basalt columns (Detunatele), mud volcanoes (Policiori, Pâclele Mari şi Mici), etc.

Table 9.1 Romania. Major mountain peaks (over 2000 m altitudes) in Carpathian Mountains (Source Geografia României, vol. I, 1983; www.insee.ro)

Romania’s position in the temperate zone at equal distances from the North Pole and the Equator (lat 45°N parallel crosses Central Romania) ratios correlated with the altitude from the Black Sea level up to the alpine zone above 2000 m, generated an amount of factors which determine the phenomenon of tourism considerably. Thus, the climatic component is determined by a limited gap in the amplitude manifestations of the main elements (temperature, precipitation, wind, etc.) and reflects positively on the general tourist movement. The regular sequence of the four seasons lies at the origin of the landscape metamorphosis, impressing the leisure activities with versatility and diversification. For example, during the winter season, the mountain area of Romania offers winter sports’ conditions similar to those existing in the Alps, while during summer, the heliomarine cure of the Black Sea coastal area is close to the Mediterranean. The tourism climatic index has elevated values in most regions of the country, except for some intra-Carpathian depressions where the rigours of climate are more pronounced and are manifested by thermal inversions with consequences on the landscape. Although generating seasonality, climate leads to complementarities by the appearance of two dominant subtypes of leisure tourism (summer and winter), which overlap regularly and seasonally.

Bioclimates’ typology on Romania’s territory highlights the diversity of the tourism potential determined by the morphological component of the relief, including (Ciangă 2006, p. 71) the exciting bioclimate of plain steppe; the exciting-requesting coastal marine bioclimate; the sedative indifferent bioclimate specific to hills and submountainous depressions; the stimulating tonic mountain bioclimate with many variations: the high medium and small mountains, the positive and negative forms of relief and the saline and caves’ microclimate highly capitalized in 6 salinas (salt mine): Slănic-Prahova, Târgu Ocna, Turda, Ocna Dej, Cacica, etc. At Ocna Sibiului, Ocna Şugatag and Ocnele Mari, they collapsed causing saltwater lake surfaces, which in turn facilitated the development of spas and resorts. In 2006, salt mines have recorded over 300,000 visitors (60% for treatment) versus 190,000 in 2003 (73% treatment). The most visited for tourist and treatment purposes were Turda, Praid (160,242 tourists) and Slănic-Prahova with 84,000 tourists (Master Plan 2007, p. 24).

Joined to the relief, closely related to architecture and its position, another determining element of the natural milieu is the hydrography. The central location of the Carpathian arch caused the creation of a radial divergent drainage system, thus covering the whole country with permanent networks such as Someş, Mureş, Crişuri, Jiu, Olt, Siret, and Prut, which are in turn collected directly or indirectly from the Danube whose length exceeds 1000 km in Romania. Considering the route, the river flow and the density of the hydrographical component, we can assert that pleasure boating, water sports, fishing, tourism transportation complete, diversify and multiply the tourist supply of the Romanian space.

Another form of expression and localization of water as a resource with multiple meanings is represented by the lakes (4040 in total) including those in the mountain area with origins ranging from the glacial circuses’ lakes: Capra, Iezer, Bâlea (4.7 ha; Photograph 9.1), Câlcescu (3 ha), Bucura (10.5 ha), Zănoaga (9 ha), etc.; the volcanic crater lakes: Sfânta Ana (22 ha) in Mount Ciomatu; karst depressions lakes: Zăton (20 ha) and Iezerul Ighiu (5.3 ha); clastokarst lakes: Ianca (322 ha); Movila Miresii (180 ha); Lacul Sarat (39 ha); the natural barrage lakes: Lacul Rosu (12.6 ha) or over 40 anthropic lakes: Porțile de Fier (Iron Gate) on the Danube (70,000 ha), Stânca-Costesti (5900 ha) on the Prut river, Vidraru on the Arges River, Vidra (950 ha) on the Lotru River, Izvoru Muntelui (3100 ha) on the Bistrita River, Siriu on the Buzau River, on the Someşul Mic River, on the Crişul Repede River; Oaşa on the Sebeş River etc., complete the landscaping and leisure function. At lower altitudes, from the sub-Carpathian Hills and the Transylvanian Depression and to the Black Sea coastal area, the natural dissolution and accumulation of water in old abandoned mines: Turda, Ocna Şugatag etc.; the rise of salt water to the surface or the silting of some gulfs or outflow mouths have generated sweet river banks: Oltina (2509 ha); Mostiştea (1860 ha), Balta Albă (1012 ha), Snagov (575 ha) etc., Amara (600 ha) etc.; river-maritime banks: Taşăul (2335 ha), Techirghiol (1161 ha), Mangalia (261 ha) etc.; sea lagoons: Razim (41,500 ha), Sinoe (17,150 ha), Zmeica (5460 ha), Siutghiol 1900 ha); river or salted meadow lakes: Ocna Sibiului, Lacul Ursu Sovata (Photograph 9.10), etc. strongly exploited for therapy or leisure. To these are added a large number of lakes in the Danube Delta with an outstanding vegetation and fauna as: Dranov (2170 ha), Red Lake (1445 ha), etc. (Photograph 9.2).

Photograph 9.1

Glacial Bâlea Lake in Făgăraş Mountains (2000 m altitude)

Photograph 9.2

Bâlea glacial valley and Transfăgărăşan pass road (2000 m) in Făgăraş Mountains

Photograph 9.3

The Corvin’s Castle (XV century) from Hunedoara (Hunedoara County)

Photograph 9.4

Peleş Castle (XIX century; Royal residence) from Sinaia (Prahova County)

Photograph 9.5

Wooden monastic complex in Bârsana Village (Maramureş County)

Photograph 9.6

Old Stone Church (XIII century) in Densuş Village (Hunedoara County)

Photograph 9.7

Voroneţ Monastery (XV century; Suceava County; UNESCO Patrimony)

Photograph 9.8

Băile Felix Spa with thermal water (Bihor County)

Photograph 9.9

Borşa. Local Ski Resort in Maramureş (Rodna Mountains)

Photograph 9.10

Sovata Spa and salt Lake Ursu (Bear) (Mureş County)

The wealth of mineral and thermal springs with over 3,000 springs, the variety of the chemical composition, and the territorial distribution especially in mountain and hilly areas are first-rank tourist resources of the Romanian space. While the thermal waters can be mainly found in the western part of Romania, most mineral springs are located in the volcanic mountainous area (dominantly in the Eastern Carpathians), where they frequently emerge under the shape of mofettes and sulphations. These resources, some capitalized since Roman times, led to the emergence of spas and internationally renowned resorts such as Băile Felix (Photograph 9.8), Băile 1 Mai, Băile Herculane, Călimăneşti-Căciulata, Băile Olanesti, Borsec, Băile Tuşnad, Vatra Dornei and Covasna a.s.o.

The Black Sea neighbourhood stretching over 245 km diversifies the potential and the tourism supply of Romania by the possibility of the sea heliotherapy and leisure and an organized tourism within many tourist resorts which stand out such as Mamaia, Neptun-Olimp, Eforie, Costineşti and Mangalia.

The vegetal cover of the Carpathian Mountains, completed by the sub-Carpathians, the hills and the plains brings their substantial contribution to the enrichment of tourist attractions’ fund. Associations of forest and grass, endemic and relict plants, plants whose cycles combined with the succession of the seasons dress the natural substrate with a wide colour variety, participate actively in the diversification and multiplication of the specific tourist supply. The territorial arrangement led to the establishment of forest flora and landscaping reserves that can be found from the Danube Delta to the highest altitudes of the Carpathians (Apuseni Nature Park, Rodna National Park, Maramures Mountains, Bucegi, etc.).

Closely correlated with the vegetation characteristics and those of the relief, the climate and the degree of human intervention, is fauna involved in tourism through certain particular aspects. In the coniferous and deciduous forests of the Carpathian Mountains, we can identify a wide variety of hunting animals (bear, deer, wild boar, wolf, fox, etc.). The fauna density and the quality of trophies recommend Romania for the profile tourism, of great economic efficiency. The Alpine area and the Southern and Eastern Carpathians, populated with chamois, as well as vast regions with rabbits, pheasants or quails, fall in the same category of hunting and recreation by hunting. Another activity is sport fishing with many ideal places to practise, from the Danube Delta where we can find sturgeons to inland rivers and lakes.

The protected areas (Tables 9.2 and 9.3; Fig. 9.2) include nine categories of which there are 13 national parks extended on 316,872 ha, 661 natural reserves, 14 natural parks, 5 wetlands of international importance, 77 scientific reserves, 230 natural monuments and 3 biosphere reserves: the Danube Delta (580,000 ha), Rodna (46,399 ha) and Retezat (38,047 ha). The activities that could be carried out related to protected areas include climbing, biking, caving, hiking, fishing, water sports, skiing, cultural attractions, ornithology, animal observation and equestrianism (Master Plan 2007, p. 13; Table 9.3).

Table 9.2 Romania. Protected Areas (2014) (Source National Agency for Environment Protection; www.insee.ro, 2014)

Table 9.3 Romania. Protected areas and prevailing forms of tourism (Source Romsilva; National Agency of Tourism; Master Plan pentru Dezvoltarea Turismului Naţional 2007–2026, 2007, pp. 14–16)

In the Romanian space, stemming from the Celtic-Dacian origin, buildings were directly related to the natural resources which lie at the basis of building materials (stone, earth and wood), the economic development level, climate, relief steps, etc., and its morphology. The anthropogenic component, grafted on an exceptionally natural basis, is multiplied and diversified by the creative contribution of the population. Old settlements are materialized by the presence of numerous artefacts, which have gradually become great interest sights for tourists. Tourist sites’ map with historical resonance includes numerous fortresses and Dacian Daves (fortress) discovered and undiscovered in the Orăştie Mountains, among which the capital of Kingdom of Dacia, Sarmizegetusa Regia, is located. In the Dobrogea region, the ruins of the following antique Greek towns are famous: Tomis (Constanţa), Histria, Callatis (Mangalia), Noviodunum, Aegysus, etc. Moreover, there are cities and feudal castles from Transilvania (Bran, Hunedoara—Photograph 9.3), Wallachia (Poienari) and Moldova (Neamt, Suceava, etc.), the former royal palaces of the former capital cities such as Iaşi, Târgovişte, Curtea de Argeş and Peleş-Sinaia (Photograph 9.4, 9.5 and 9.6).

Another category of tourist attractions with a large territorial spread are the cultural and religious buildings from the Sarmizegetusa Regia Dacian sanctuaries, as well as the wood or stone churches in Transilvania, Banat, Crişana and Maramureş, unique by the building novelty, adorned with frescoes, and icons on glass, wood or canvas. Many of the existing cathedrals in the Romanian area, as a consequence of the multicultural political context determined by historical times, are identified with the Romanesque, Gothic and especially the Neogothic style (Cocean 1997). Other famous sites are renowned monasteries in Bucovina, monuments of the world art, which stand out because of the exterior frescoes from the churches of Voroneț (Photograph 9.7), Humor, Sucevița, Moldoviţa, Arbore, etc. The monasteries are located in a continuous belt in the sub-Carpathian area, from Moldavia up to Oltenia, with monumental buildings such as Agapia, Văratec, Curtea de Argeş, Cozia, Bistriţa, Hurez, Polovragi and Tismana.

Among the above-mentioned sites, seven are included in the UNESCO world heritage (Fig. 9.3; Master Plan 2007, p. 19): the Danube Delta (since 1991); 7 monasteries of Bucovina and Moldova: Arbore, Humor, Moldoviţa, Pătrăuţi, Probota, Suceviţa and Voroneţ (since 1993); Horezu Monastery (since 1993); 7 villages with fortified churches in Transylvania: Biertan, Câlnic, Dârjiu, Saschiz, Prejmer, Valea Viilor and Viscri (since 1993 and 1997); Dacian fortresses of the Orăştie Mountains: Baniţa, Căpâlna, Costeşti, etc. (since 1999 with 6 points of interest); the historic centre of Sighisoara since 1999; and 8 wooden churches of Maramureș: Bârsana, Budeşti, Deseşti, Ieud Deal, Poienile Izei, Rogoz, Şurdeşti and Plopiş (since 1999). Joined to them, there are about 30,000 items of heritage, of which 6.614 are international and national-interest objectives, such as archaeological sites, buildings of historical and architectural interest, monuments and statues. There are 288 buildings included in the memorial houses’ category, from the Peleş Castle (Photograph 9.4) to some small-scale houses in the rural area. The most numerous are concentrated in the counties of Transylvania (Mureş, Sibiu, Cluj, Braşov, Covasna, Hunedoara), the Central Wallachia (Dâmboviţa, Prahova, Argeş) and Dobrogea (Constanţa), hence their importance in terms of cultural heritage (Master Plan 2007, p. 19). To these are added the 675 authorized museums and 220 art galleries that have attracted over 10.5 million visitors in 2005, a substantial increase compared to 1990 with 1.7 million visitors (Master Plan 2007, p. 20). The most visited were the cultural history museums, followed by those of art, ethnography and history. Of these, 28 museums are of national importance, 14 of regional importance and 41 of county importance, noting that about 50% of museums are located in Bucharest. For a higher capitalization of this resource, the National Network of Museums in Romania was established in 2006.

The authenticity and specificity for the Romanian space results from a wide range of tourist sites and ethnographic events. The ethnographic tourist resources of Romania can be considered unusual and unique, and the Romanian countryside is a living museum with tourist valences which are difficult to quantify. The popular architecture stands out by the woodworking craft, the gates being famous in this sense, the houses and the annexes of Maramureş, Bucovina or the Apuseni Mountains. In this context, households bear a landmark of a place, differed by the combination of some specific features of the natural and cultural-spiritual values. The customs, costumes, songs and games differ from one ethnographic area to another, in turn numerous and varied.

A wide variety of the physical and geographical conditions, the multitude of depressionary areas situated on the outskirts of the mountains and in inland valleys and the important treasures of the soil and underground soil have particularized within these units the “lands” (Cocean 1997a; Ilieş et al. 1998; Cocean and Filip 2008), similar to natural fortresses which have offered the most favourable conditions of settlement and population stability since the ancient times. Genuine living museums, each with its specificity, are located in the 19 geographical land-type regions on the Romanian territory, such as Maramureş (Ilieş 2007a), Oaş (Ilieş 2007c), Lăpuş (Dezsi 2007), Năsăud (Ilovan 2009), Silvania (Josan 2009), Chioar (Puşcaş 2010), Moţilor (Boţan 2010), Zărand (David 2010), Almăj (Ianăş 2011), Beiuş, Făgăraş, Amlaş, Dorna and Haţeg. They represent sacred spaces where the popular creators’ imagination seems borderless, as they constantly express their permanent tendency towards originality; they are “living organisms” with a tangible contemporary reality.

Both space and time, the geographical position and the historical background, underlie the genesis of significant tourism potential based on the association of the mountainous scenery of the Carpathians and the Black Sea Riviera, as tourist areas of high potential, with numerous geosites and geolandscapes (Ilieş and Josan 2009). Among numerous qualities which may attract tourists, there are the mineral thermal and thermomineral waters with qualities rarely encountered across Europe, a remarkable caving potential, the density and morphology of the components, the climate which is conducive to a year-round tourist traffic, a great and wealthy anthropic tourist fund, variety and originality, and finally, the hospitality and generosity of the Romanian people.

9.3 The Accommodation Infrastructure

The establishments of tourist reception with functions of tourist accommodation are infrastructure elements which support the tourist phenomena in reception areas and include, according to Romanian National Institute of Statistics (www.insee.ro; Fig. 9.4), hotels and motels, hotels for youth, hostels, tourist inns, tourist chalets, camping and house-let-type units, tourist villas and bungalows, school camps, touristic boarding houses, agro-touristic boarding houses, tourist halting places, holiday villages and ships accommodation space. The diversification of reception units from 6 to 13 types in the period 1985–2010 is also highlighted by the formers’ official registration: touristic boarding houses in 1993, holiday villages in 1994, agro-touristic boarding houses and accommodation on ships in 1996, and first youth hotels, hostels and tourist halts in 2000. Following an evolving trend (Fig. 9.5), after a decline from 3330 units in 1985 to 3213 existing structures in 1990, their number gradually increased to 4840 structures in 2008, 5222 in 2010 and 5821 in 2012. In the meantime, in 1993, following the reclassification of these units as well as the change of ownership status (transfer from public to private), their number dropped to 2682, so that in 2001 (within a 10-year time lapse), their number (3266 units) reaches the figure recorded in 1992 (3227 units). Amid restructuring or closure of units, decreases were also registered during 1999–2000 (−129 units), 2006/2007 (−16 units) and 2010–2011 (−219 units).

From the structural point of view, in 1985 (according to www.insse.ro), the 3330 units consisted of the following (Fig. 9.5): 784 hotels and motels (23.5%), 1464 villas (43.9%), 215 chalets (6.4%), 213 campsites (6, 3%), 174 school camps (5.2%) and 115 inns (3.4%) accounting for some 410,575 beds and reaching a total of 418,944 beds in 1989, followed by a downward trend. In 2000 (first year of registration of all 13 types) of the 3121 units, the largest share was held by the tourist villas and bungalows (1066; 34.1%), hotels and motels (943 units; 30.2%) and agro-touristic boarding houses (400; 12.8%).

Compared with 2000, in ten years (2010; Fig. 9.6), due to an increase of 67.3%, and in the year 2012 (5222 units), due to an increase of 86.5% in the number of units (namely 5821 units; Fig. 9.6), structural changes occurred that brought on the first positions the agro-touristic boarding houses (1384–1569; 27.8–26.9%), hotels and motels (1264–1606; 26.1–27.6%), villas and bungalows (982–863; 20.3–14.8%) and touristic boarding houses (783–1247; 16.2–21.4%). The growing number of hotels is due to private initiatives and an increased demand within cities for business tourism. Furthermore, the number of guesthouses and holiday villages is increasing mainly due to rural tourism development, a type of tourism that had not existed before 1990.

Many households have been adapted, or new ones were built with a purpose of turning them into agro-touristic boarding houses prevailing in areas such as Rucăr-Bran Culoar, Bucovina, Maramureş, the Apuseni Mountains, the sub-Carpathian range and the Transylvanian submountainous depression area. There is an obvious drop in the number of villas and bungalows (−84 units) due to the doubling or tripling of other categories. The accommodation structures which have witnessed a decrease during 1990–2008 refer to the tourist inns, tourist chalets, camping sites and school camps, while the other categories (generally having emerged after 2000) showed moderate increase.

At regional level (Fig. 9.7), there are considerable differences between the administrative-territorial units (NUTS 3) according to their geographical position in the whole Carpathian-Danubian-Pontic area. Of the 5821 existing accommodation units in Romania (in 2012), most are located within the counties: Constanţa (738), Braşov (646), Harghita (344), Suceava (296), Prahova (262), Vâlcea (260), Cluj (234), Mureş (214), Argeş (187), Caraş-Severin (181), Neamţ (177), Maramureş (171), Arad (170), Timiş (153), Bihor (145), Tulcea (136), Bucureşti (131), Alba (113), Sibiu (109), Covasna (100), etc.

In terms of attractiveness, of the 13 types of accommodation units, the most attractive from the tourist resorts and the urban milieu are hotels, motels, villas and touristic boarding houses, namely agro-touristic boarding houses in the rural milieu. To these, the villas especially from within tourist resorts can be added. At the regional level, most hotels and motels are located in Constanta County (304), whose position on the Black Sea coast accounts for the presence of 27% of the hotel network in Romania. The second position is held by the capital of Bucharest (105 units) as a particularly polarizing centre for business and cultural tourism. There are also counties that include on their territory famous resorts as: Brașov (102) and Prahova (91), which have on their territory Poiana Brașov Resort and Prahova Valley; Vâlcea (58) with three resorts, Timiș (72), Cluj (64), Mureș (61) and Bihor (49) as urban polarizing business and university centres as well as of Transylvania, Crișana and Banat, respectively. And for urban villas and touristic boarding houses, a similar distribution with the previous one can be noted especially in the case of the counties with tourist resorts. Tourist chalets (146 units) prevail by presence in counties with mountain areas such as Brasov (21), Prahova (14), Harghita (12), Suceava (13) and Sibiu (10). There is an increasing trend in the case of agro-touristic boarding houses (1569 units), especially in areas with a cultural and historical potential as in the case of the counties: Brasov (260), Harghita (179), Suceava (130), Neamț (100), Cluj (92), Argeș (88), Maramures (78), Vâlcea (62) and Alba (61). The four counties located in remarkable tourist areas concentrate 58% (925 units) of all the units of its type in Romania, being in the meantime the promoters of a genuine rural tourism in regions such as Maramureș, Bucovina, Rucăr-Bran and Giurgeu-Ciuc.

The accommodation capacity at the national level (Fig. 9.8), based on official statistics recorded for 2008, reveals two categories: the existing one¹ with a total of 294,210 beds and the one in operation with 59,188,000 beds-days. The existing accommodation capacity (after 2000) increased in two periods: in 2005–2010 (with +29,037 beds) and 2011–2014 (+32,725 beds), with a regress in 2010–2011 (−33,195 beds). The values in 2010 (311,698) and 2014 (311,288) are under values registered in 1990 (353,236 beds) with 42,000 beds and then in 1985 with over 99,000 beds (410,575 beds). These situations are due to the type of the ownership’s change, the modernization of some structures and the limitation of the beds’ number in favour of a higher classification, as well as due to the closure of some structures belonging to the public system (state). The most relevant example is that of hotels and motels which recorded from 1990 (830 units) an increment of 567 units in 2010 (68.3%) and 776 units (93.5%) in 2012. The entire accommodation capacity increased lightly with 31.021 places (+11.0%) in 2010 (maximum value after 1990) and 20,432 places (+7.3%) in 2012. By reporting the total number of beds to the accommodation structures, there is a decrease in the number of large-scale structures in favour of the ones of a lower capacity, from 202 beds/unit in 1990 to 143 beds/unit in 2008 and 52 beds/unit in 2012. In terms of structure type, the highest values regarding the accommodation capacity of 2012 were attributable to campsites and house-lets (179), hotels (118 beds/unit), school and preschool camps (156 beds/unit), hostels (42), chalets (35), villas have an average of 20 beds/unit, agro-touristic boarding houses 17 beds/unit and touristic boarding houses 20 beds/unit.

The tourist accommodation capacity by type of ownership included 5 types in 1994: public, mixed, private, cooperative and community/state-based. In the reference years 2008 and 2012, the situation has greatly simplified, being recorded only two types: state majority (public) and private majority. There were 2840 accommodation units in 1994 among which 76.0% state-owned and merely 10.0% private-owned; the situation has changed radically in 2008 and 2012. Amid the doubling of the number of structures to 4,840 (2008) and 5,821 (2012), the private domain’s share was of 87.2% (3516 units) in 2008 and 95.8% (5577 units) in 2012. The existing capacity registers relatively identical values in the three reference years, namely 292,479 beds in 1990, 294,210 beds in 2008 and 301,109 beds in 2012, but in this case with substantial changes by type of ownership: 83.9% (245,343 beds) in 1990 in the public domain, namely 80.0% (235,374 beds) in 2008 and 90.2% (271.735 beds) in 2012 in the private domain.

Indices of the net using the touristic accommodation capacity in operation between 1990 and 2012 have seen a dominant downward trend from 57.8% dominant in 1990 to 36.0% in 2007 with a minimum of 25.2% in 2010 and 25.9% in 2012, a fact which reflects the lowering number of tourists in post-socialist Romania (Fig. 9.8). The most important drops per categories of units can be encountered for hotels and motels (from 65.8% in 1990 to 31.2% in 2012), touristic inns (from 46.6 to 10.6%), school and preschool camps from 73.2 to 12.3%, touristic boarding house from 19 to 14.8%, etc. In the category of those structures which registered increases, we can refer to the emerging agro-touristic boarding houses from 12.3 to 13.2%, youth hotels from 15 to 17.7% and particularly on-ship accommodation spaces from 8.6% in 1996 to 65.4% in 2012. The lowest use indices in 2012 are in case of touristic inns and touristic halting places with 10.6%, touristic chalets with 11.1% and school and preschool camps with 12.3%, a situation due to strong seasonality that characterizes these accommodation structures. According to the comfort category, a higher value is held by the two-star (37.6%) and five-star (35.9%) establishments.

The regional distribution of the existing accommodation capacity (2012) is in line with Romania’s main tourist areas as follows (Fig. 9.9): Constanța 120,944 beds (2008) to 84,690 beds (2012), Bucharest 16,882 beds to 19.327 beds, Brasov 15,729 beds to 21.699 beds, Vâlcea 10,596 beds to 12.540 beds, Bihor 9984 beds to 10.284 beds, Prahova 9918 beds to 11.114 beds, etc. In terms of the accommodation capacity in operation (2012), we can notice that besides the “tourist counties”, the following counties have a significant value: Cluj, Suceava, Timiș, Maramureș, Mureș, Sibiu, Neamț, Argeș, Arad and Caraș-Severin.

Relevant evidence for this is rendered by the indices of net using of capacity in operation (%) which outlines the main tourists’ receiving areas. If this value was nationally at 25.9%, the highest rates of room occupancy in operation were recorded (in 2012) in the counties of (Fig. 9.9): Bihor 38.1% (10,284 beds), Vâlcea 36.8% (12,540 beds), Giurgiu 36.1% (864 beds), Covasna 36% (4836 beds), Ialomiţa 35.9% (3106 beds), Constanţa 35.7% (84,690 beds), Brăila 34.6% (2589 beds), Iaşi 31.0% (3530 beds), București 29.9% (19.327 beds), Mureș 28.0% (9.137 beds), Caraş-Severin 27.4% (7566 beds), Sibiu 26.8% (6125 beds), Galaţi 25.4% (1324 beds) and Bacău 25.2% (3.613 beds). Except for Constanţa, Covasna, Vâlcea and Bihor, the other “tourist counties” as Maramureş 12.1% (4730 beds), Prahova 23.2% (11,114 beds) and Suceava 22.6% (9447 beds) record moderate values.

According to the comfort level, the most numerous accommodation establishments (in 2012) were the two-star (1899 units; 32.6%), three-star (2603 units; 44.7%), four-star (572 units; 9.8%), one-star (504 units; 8.6%) and five-star (115 units; 2%) establishments. The ones of a higher category recorded low values such as 8.6% for one-star and 2% for five-star establishments. The most diversified are hotels, villas, and urban and rural guesthouses, whereas the range of 1–3 stars is mainly the characteristic of motels, lodges, hostels, bungalows, etc. The high accommodation capacity is attributable to three-star 36.4% (109,717 beds) and two-star establishments 33.8% (101,970 beds), and a similar situation to that of the accommodation capacity in operation is 40.7% (3*) and 30.8% (2*). The most representative establishments in this category are hotels (63.8%). In case of guesthouses, touristic and agro-touristic boarding houses, motels and villas, the most occupied are the two-star establishments. The 4- and 5-star establishments represent 16.5% of the existing accommodation capacity, mainly distributed in hotels (60.3%). Within these categories also fall the agro-touristic boarding house (9.1%), touristic boarding houses (8.3%), villas and bungalows (5.8%), school and preschool camps (4.4%), etc.

The number of establishments and the accommodation capacity of the main tourist areas (in 2012)

The main tourist areas according to statistical national institute are mountain resorts; the Black Sea Coast; Bucharest and other 40 county residence towns; spas resorts; Danube Delta; and other urban and rural localities (Figs. 9.10 and 9.11).

The mountain resorts (in 2012) concentrate 23.6% of the accommodation establishments (1376), including all 16 types among which the hotels are 175 (12.7%), numerous agro-touristic boarding houses (39.7%), boarding houses (18.9%), villas (14.8%), hotels (10.8%) and touristic chalets (7.1%). In that area, there are 45,427 places (15.0% of total per country), distributed dominated within hotels 35.8% (16,297 places). The mountain resort area concentrates a large number of low-capacity establishments, the value of 33.0 places/establishment being relevant in this regard. Furthermore, the accommodation capacity in operation was 13,195 million places-days (17.7% of total) of which 38.6% (5.102 million places-days) in hotels. Also, the indices of net using of capacity in operation increased from 18.4% in 2012 to 19.8 in 2014. The average duration of stay is 2.2 days (in 2012).

The Black Sea Coast (in 2012) is the second area of concentration with 676 accommodation establishments (11.6% from total), but with a lower range (10 types) of establishments and the prevalence of hotels (38.0%), villas and bungalows. By the accommodation capacity (80,840 places), the coast is by far the most important tourist area, concentrating 26.8% of all accommodation places in Romania, dominantly distributed within hotels (74.7%), campsites, school and preschool camps and villas. The average value of accommodation establishment is 119.5 places/establishment. Of the 9.483 million places-days (12.8% from total) characterizing the accommodation capacity in operation in the seaside area, by their structure, size and running duration, hotels record the highest value (7.744 million places-days; 81.7% from total). The indices of net using of capacity in operation decreased from 36.3% in 2012 to 23.2% in 2014. The average duration of stay was 4.3 days (in 2012).

Bucharest and other 40 county residence towns (in 2012) concentrate 22.2% of the hospitality establishments of the country (1295 units) and 26.4% of the accommodation capacity (79,715 places). With an average of 61.5 places/establishment, hotels (598) are also best represented with 46.1% in this area, followed by touristic boarding house and villas. The number of places is mainly higher in hotels (61,406 places; 77%). The accommodation capacity in operation was the most important in Romania by the 27.3 million places-days (36.7% of all country), over 80.0% (21.7 million places-days) belonging to hotels. The indices of net using of capacity in operation increased from 24.9% in 2012 to 29.6% in 2014. The average duration of stay was 1.8 days (in 2012).

Spas resorts (in 2012) concentrate 8.4% (488 units) of the accommodation establishments of Romania, 13.0% of the number of places (about 39,279), with an average of 80.5 places/establishments, and 13.4% of the accommodation capacity in use (9.95 million places-days). Most of the hospitality establishments relate to hotels 28.0% (137) and villas, a relatively similar situation to that of the accommodation capacity: 70.7% in hotels (average value of 93 places/hotel) followed by touristic boarding house and villas. In terms of the accommodation capacity in operation from 9.95 million places-days (13.4% from total), the hotels are most demanded with 77.5% (7.71 million places-days), followed by touristic boarding houses. The indices of net using of capacity in operation decreased from 42.9% in 2012 to 38.8 in 2014. The average duration of stay was 6.1 days (in 2012).

The Danube Delta (in 2012), an area where protected areas dominate, holds 8 types in a total of 136 accommodation establishments (2.34% of total), with an accommodation capacity of 4767 beds (1.6% of total). The accommodation capacity in operation is of 0.64 million places-days (0.9% of total). The prevailing types of establishments are medium and small size (an average of 35 beds/establishment) such as the villas and bungalows, agro-touristic boarding houses and hotels (102 places/unit). The highest rate of the accommodation capacity is the characteristic of hotels with 38.6% (1843 places), campsites, school and preschool touristic camps and villas. The accommodation capacity in operation (0.64 million places-days; 0.87% from total) reflects the situation of the places’ distribution where the number of hotels 76.7% (0.493 million places-days) dominates the landscape, followed by villas. The indices of net using of capacity in operation decreased from 20.8% in 2012 to 19.5 in 2014. The average duration of stay was 1.5 days (in 2012).

Other urban and rural areas (in 2012) in Romania cluster 31.8% (1,850 units) of the total number of hospitality establishments, with a total of 51,081 places (16.9% of total) and an average of 28 places/establishment. The most numerous are agro-touristic boarding houses, followed by touristic boarding houses and hotels (11.6% and 215 units). Instead, most places are within hotels (27.3%; 13,941 places) with an average of 65 places/establishment, agro-touristic boarding houses and school and preschool touristic camps. The accommodation capacity in operation (13.5 million places-days; 18.3% from total) holds high values for hotels 33.1% (4.5 million places-days), agro-touristic boarding houses, touristic boarding houses and school camps. The indices of net using of capacity in operation increased from 15.5% in 2012 to 18.1 in 2014. The average duration of stay was 1.8 days (in 2012).

9.4 The Tourist Movement

The tourist movement by the number of arrivals within accommodation establishments

The economic efficiency of the tourism and hospitality industry is also given by the quality and diversity of the tourist supply which in turn determines the size, orientation and structure of tourist movement. In Romania’s case, the changes in this respect were quantitatively and structurally deeper, with values which have generally reflected the political and economic situation of the country. Twenty years after the fall of socialism, the Romanian tourism is still below the values recorded in the last years of the respective period. Thus, if in the time lapse 1985–1989 (Fig. 9.12), considered the last “five-year plan of the socialist planned economy”, there was a slow increase in the number of tourists registered within accommodation establishments from 11.959 million to 12.971 million people (Romanian tourism peak year), the following period has decreased continuously with a minimum of 4.847 million people in 2002. The fall of the socialist system, the opening of borders and the free movement of people and Romania’s integration into the EU and NATO should be considerable enough incentives to reorganize and resize Romanian tourism quantitatively and qualitatively. If the year with the lowest number of tourists was 2002 (three times less than during the socialist system), the growth that followed was not as expected barely reaching 7125 million people in 2008, 7687 million in 2012 (only half over the value of 1989) and 8942 million in 2014.

Some of the causes that have triggered this situation include restricting social subsidies granted to the population under socialism (Cocean 1995, p. 105); the decreasing standard of living; restricting leisure time by subsistence activities; the unfavourable image and the political unsteadiness of Romania at an international scale; the rising prices of tourist services on the backdrop of lower incomes; inadequate infrastructure and unadjusted to the modern requirements in terms of quality and quantity; and the increase in foreign tourist movement.

After the area of origin in 2014 (Fig. 9.17), due to a decrease of the total number of accommodated tourists, 6.926 million (77.4%) are domestic, well below the value registered in 1990 of 10.8 million (88.4%). The minimum value was reached in 2002 with a total of 3.848 million tourists (79.4% domestic). The number of foreign tourists who visited Romania, compared to other Central and Eastern European countries, is low, the maximum values being recorded in 1990 (1.432 million), in 2012 (1.656 million) and 2.015 million in 2014, while the minimum value belongs to the years 1995 and 1996 with 0.76 million people. As a share of the total number of tourists, foreigners reached 24.6% in 2005, the minimum being 10.8% in 1995.

After tourist destinations (Fig. 9.13, 9.14, 9.15), in 2012, Bucharest and the county residence town have attracted 49.7% of the accommodated tourists (3.81 million), followed by far by the urban and rural localities of Romania 15.1% (1.16 million), mountain resorts 14.6% (1.121 million), spas resorts 9.1% (0.70 million), seaside resorts 10.5% (0.805 million) and the Danube Delta with 1.1% (0.088 million). After the origin areas, by destination, the spas record 95.7%, seaside resorts 95.5%, mountain resorts 89.9% and 84% other localities reflect the dominance of Romanian tourists, while foreign tourists’ share represents 33.1% in Bucharest and in the county seats and 35.2% in the Danube Delta. Romanian tourists prefer Bucharest and the county seats 42.4% and only 0.9% the Danube Delta as domestic destinations. Mountain resorts are preferred by 16.7%, 16.2% tourists prefer other localities, 11% prefer spas, and seaside resorts are chosen by 12.8% of visitors. In case of foreign tourists, Bucharest and the county seats attract 76.2% of the total, followed by far by other localities 11.1%, mountain resorts 7%, seaside resorts 6.8% and spas 2.2%, while the Danube Delta held 1.9% of the accommodated foreign tourists in 2012.

Arrivals of foreign visitors in Romania

The tourist attractiveness of the Romanian area of the specific tourist product and supply is reflected in the number of foreign tourists and their area of origin (Fig. 9.16). According to the statistics in the period 1990–2014, the number of foreign tourists witnessed a decline from 6.532 million in 1990 to 5.898 million in 1994 and 4.794 million in 2002 (the lowest value recorded), with slight upward trends in 1999 and 2000, followed by an upward trend reaching 8.862 million in 2008, 7.937 million in 2012 and 8.975 million foreign tourists in 2014 (maximum value after post-socialist period; Fig. 9.16). The majority of foreign tourists (94.1%) come from the European political space (especially the EU), 2.72% from Asia, 2.6% from America, etc.

Across Europe (including Russia and Turkey), the origin area of tourists who visited Romania in 1994 included countries such as Bulgaria 1.022 million (17.3%), Moldova 0.803 million (13.6%), Serbia and Montenegro 0.634 million (10.7%), Hungary 0.628 million (10.6%), Ukraine 0.593 million (10.0%), Turkey 0.535 million (9.1%), Russia 0.443 million (7.5%), Germany 0.203 million (3.44%), the Czech Republic 0.121 million (2.05%), Italy 0.093 million (1.6%), Slovakia, Poland, the Netherlands, the UK, Belarus, Macedonia, France, and Austria. We can note that the dominant area of tourists who visited Romania overlapped with that of neighbouring countries and represented 62% (3.680 million) of total foreign tourists (Fig. 9.17).

In 2008, a year after Romania’s integration into the EU, the number of foreign tourists increased to 8.862 million, by 14.76% in comparison with 2007, the year of the integration. The main origin area has remained the entire European area, representing 95% of the total, with recorded changes at a state scale. Foreign tourists who visited Romania in 2008 consisted of 22.0% Hungarians (1.950 million), 16.1% Moldavians (1.429 million), 12.5% Bulgarians (1.114 million), 8.2% Ukrainians (0.730 million), Germans 5.9% (0.522 million), Italians 4.9% (0.433 million), Turks 3.4% (0.303 million), Poles 3.1% (0.277 million), 2.36% Austrians (0.210 million), 2.1% Serbs (0.184), 2.06% French (0.183 million), Slovaks 1.67% (0.148 million), 1.52% Czech (0.135 million), 1.44% English (0.128 million), Greeks 1.33% (0.118 million), etc. Compared to 1994, in 2008, we find a similar area of origin of the 5.407 million tourists, but with a different distribution by states. In 2009 compared with 2008, the number of foreign tourists decreased to 7.57 million (−1.287 million).

In the period 2009–2014, the number of foreign tourists slowly increased to 8.975 million in 2014 (Fig. 9.18). Arrivals of foreign visitors in Romania, by main origin countries in 2014 are from Hungary (1.6 million; 17.7%), Bulgaria (1.307 million; 14.5%), the Republic of Moldova (1.120 million; 12.4%), Ukraine (0.740 million; 8.2%), Germany (0.49 million; 5.4%), Italy (0.370 million; 4.1%), Poland (0.32 million; 3.6%), Serbia (0.289 million), Turkey (0.267 million), Austria (0.211 million), Russia (0.159 million), France (0.154 million), the UK (0.146 million), Slovakia (0.100 million), etc.

When comparing 2008 with 2014, in the category of tourist-emitting states, the countries that stand out are Hungary (−0.356 million), Italy (−0.056 million), Germany (−0.031 million), France (−0.029 million), etc. By contrast, massive drops are recorded in case of Bulgaria (+0.193), Poland (+0.046), the UK (+0.018 million), etc., which send a greater number of tourists.

In both Americas, in the same period, a slight increase from 0.049 million tourists in 1994 to 0.137 million visitors in 2008 and 0.268 in 2014 was recorded. We also need to mention visitors from Asia, 0.304 million (3.4%) in 2014 (0.224 million in 2008), etc. It should be noted that most tourists come for the purpose of a holiday and to visit friends and relatives (in the case of the neighbouring states) and for business trips in case of states which do not bordered with Romania (especially Italy, Turkey, Germany, etc.).

Departures of Romanian visitors abroad

The change of the political regime by the fall of the socialist system, the elimination of visas for Romanian citizens, revenues’ increase for certain professional categories and the national and international political and economic circumstances are some of the arguments underlying the increase or decrease of the number of Romanian tourists who visited tourist destinations other than Romania. At the same time, the same type of arguments is true for the numerical fluctuations during 1990–2012. In 1990, the first year of post-communist freedom, the number of Romanian tourists going abroad was one of the highest of all the time lapse, i.e. 11.275 million visitors, being exceeded only in 2008 by the 13.072 million visitors and 2014 with 13.348 million visitors. Gradual reduction in the number was due to the required visa for Romanian tourists, which triggered a minimum of 5.737 million in 1995, a value similar to the one from 1996 (5.748 million) and 2002 (5.757 million). The elimination of visa requirements for Romanians in 2004 is reflected in the almost doubling of the number of tourists from 6.9 million to 13.07 million in 2008 and 13.348 million in 2014. For example, in 2012, according to the official statistics of Romania, Romanians have made 826,692 trips abroad of which 56% are for holiday, 37.1% are to visit friends and relatives and 6.9% are for business. The main destination countries were as follows: Italy 20.4%, Greece 12.2%, Spain 7.6%, Germany 6.6%, Hungary 12.4%, Austria 9.9%, Turkey 4.6%, France 4.1%, Bulgaria 12.9%, the USA 0.5%, Moldavia (1.16%), Switzerland, Croatia, Canada, Israel, Poland, Belgium, the UK, etc.

The overall tourist balance registered in Romania is determined by a net unfavourable higher number of outgoing tourists in relation to incoming tourists. The largest differences were recorded in 1990 (4.743 million), 1993 (4.971 million), 1993 (4.504 million) and 2008 (4.210 million), while the lowest values were recorded in 1995 (−0.292 million) and 2004 (−0.372 million). Between 2004 and 2014, this gap has widened considerably over 10 times, from −0.372 million visitors to −4.210 million visitors in 2008, −3.212 million visitors in 2012 and −4.372 million visitors in 2014 in favour of Romanian outgoing tourists.

The means of transport

Among the means of transport used by foreign visitors who have visited Romania during 1990–2014 (Fig. 9.19), we can note the prevalence of the road transport whose proportion has increased from 56% in 1990 to 76% in 2014. The annual average is 4.3 million visitors/year with extreme values of 3.5 million visitors in 1998 and 6.8 million visitors in 2014. The railway transport came after the road ones in 1990 with a share of 36% and about 2.3 million tourists. Gradually, their share has fallen dramatically, with a sharp decline after 2000, at a minimum of 2.0% in 2014 and only 0.182 million visitors. In parallel, air transport, by increasing flights and increasing the number of airlines operating on lines for Romania, has increased from 0.271 million visitors (4.1% of total) in 1990 to 1.78 million visitors (19.9% total) in 2014. The use of ships is distinguished by the constant number of visitors (about 0.173 million/year) and its share (3.0% annually). The largest number of visitors came to Romania by water in 1990 (0.242 million) and 2014 (0.191 million). The trend in 2014 (8.97 million visitors) compared to 2008 (8.862 million visitors) consisted in the growth of air transport (+0.323 million) and a reduction for road transport (−0.068 million), railway (−0.071 million) and naval (−0.071 million).

The vehicles used by Romanian tourists reveal a similar situation with that of arrivals, i.e. dominance of road and air transport and reduction in the case of railway and water transports. In case of road transport, if between 1990 and 2014 there were increases reaching 76.2% of the total, the aftermath registers a 79.4% decline all due to the increase in visitor’s numbers from 6 million to 10.183 million in the same time lapse. Rail transport follows the same descending line from a share of 22.2% (2.5 million visitors) in 1990 to 1.3% (0.169 million visitors) in 2014, the decline becoming more acute after 2001. A considerable increase was recorded for visitors transported by air transport with 0.265 million (2.4%) in 1990 to a maximum of 2.97 million tourists in 2014 (22.2%). Water transportation, although with a reduced number of visitors (about 100,000 annually), shows a regressive trend from 0.113 million in 1990 (1%) to 24,000 in 2014 (0.3%). Analysing data from the years 2004 to 2014, the range of the number of tourists increased upward trend transported stands for air transport (+2.70 million) and road (+4.18 million) and regressive for the rail (−0.055 million) and the ship (−0.026 million).

Air transport in Romania was served by a network of 16 national and international airports for tourism in 2006 and 18 airports in 2014 (Fig. 9.20). The number of passengers in 2014 reached 11.6 million, versus 2 million in 1999 and 9.1 million in 2008. While scheduled flights in 1999 held 95% of all charter passengers in 2004, charter flights rose to 15% with a total of 0.5 million passengers. The most transited airports in 2014 were Henri Coandă from Bucharest with 8.3 million passengers, Avram Iancu from Cluj-Napoca with 1.182 million passengers and Traian Vuia from Timisoara with 0.736 million and (Table 9.4).

Table 9.4 Romania. The international airports and passengers traffic (Source www.romanianairports.ro, 2014; www.aviatia.ro; Master Planul pentru Dezvoltarea Turismului Naţional 2007–2026, 2007, p. 14–16

The concept of rail travel is a niche product like the Orient Express.

Internal access by railroad is provided to large urban centres and a large number of tourist resorts. The only narrow-gauge railway line of 60 km operates in the Maramureș Mountains on one of the most scenic mountain tourist trail. So it is Oravița-Anina route, where there is the oldest railway in Romania.

9.5 Resorts and Tourist Destinations

The combination of natural features specific to natural milieu with the infrastructural ones has triggered tourist resort-type territorial systems. Depending on the curative or recreational needs within Romania, approved by the Ministry of Tourism, there are spas (built on the basis of mineral thermal waters and curative mud), climatic resorts (which turn into good account the particular curative valences of mountain areas) and mixed (curative-recreational/leisure) resorts (Fig. 9.20). Many of the resorts in Romania have a considerable experience, particularly those that exploit and capitalize thermal waters. Since ancient times, these have been known as concentration areas for tourists due to mineral and thermal waters such as Germisara/Geoagiu Băi, Herculanum/Băile Herculane, Aquae/Băile Călan, and Băile Felix (Photograph 9.8). In the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, mineral springs are highly capitalized giving rise to resorts such as Sovata, Vatra Dornei, Borsec and Slanic Moldova, mainly located in the mountain and sub-Carpathian area. Most health resorts, addressing curative tourism, hold natural therapeutic factors and are mainly located in the mountain area (Moneasa, Geoagiu-Băi, Băile Herculane, Călimăneşti, Covasna, Borsec in the sub-Carpathian area (Băile Olăneşti, Slănic, Govora, Pucioasa, Târgu Ocna), Plateau of Transylvania (Ocna Sibiului, Bazna, Turda, Sovata (Fig. 9.31) the Western Hills (Băile Felix and 1 Mai (Photograph 9.8), Buziaş and Eastern Romanian Plain (Amara, Lacul Sărat, etc.) (Photographs 9.9 and 9.10).

Climatic resorts ensure a long-term stay, turn to good account the bioclimatic milieu and other natural factors, being the latest, besides health tourism, winter sports also intermingle. These are usually located in the mountain areas such as Poiana Braşov, Pârîul Rece, Cheia, Băişoara, Beliş-Fântânele, Lacul Roşu, Izvoare, Mogoşa, Semenic, Sinaia, Predeal, Buşteni, Semenic, Stâna de Vale, Poiana Ţapului and Rânca and the sub-Carpathian region. This type of resorts also exists in the coastal area: 2 Mai, Costineşti, Năvodari, Venus, Neptun-Olimp, Aurora, Jupiter, Saturn, etc. With reference to spas, characterized as polyvalent by specialization, with a wide range of facilities, services and supply, and high accommodation capacity and with a wide territorial distribution, we can refer to Băile Herculane, Călimăneşti-Căciulata, Vatra Dornei, Borşa (Fig. 9.30), Băile Tuşnad, Sângeorz-Băi, Moneasa, etc., in the mountains or Mangalia, Eforie, Năvodari, Techirghiol, etc., on the coast. Most of the resorts along the Prahova Valley and the coast were developed in the second half of the twentieth century.

In Romania, there are about 160 resorts and tourist localities, and within some of them, especially within spas, there are treatments with original Romanian medicines as Gerovital Pell-Amar, etc., or by diversification of the medical supply such as acupuncture, apitherapy, beauty care and Reiki technique (Cândea et al. 2003, p. 176).

The accommodation component differs from one resort to another, from the mountains to the plains and to the coast. Most hotels are located in major cities on the coast and in some resorts such as Poiana Brasov, on the Prahova Valley, on the Olt Valley, Baile Herculane. The villas prevail within the climatic resorts and spas as Vatra Dornei, Borsec, Sinaia, Predeal, Buşteni, etc., and chalets prevail in the alpine and subalpine areas. Camping sites are concentrated within resorts and big cities, while in the rural milieu of the Carpathian range prevail large-scale tourist and agro-touristic boarding houses, especially in tourist localities.

In the year 2002, the Ministry of Tourism has reviewed the tourist resorts of Romania, identifying two categories: national and local levels. In 2015, the list with attested resorts included the following (Fig. 9.1; Table 9.5): Forty-one resorts of national interest distributed within 18 counties including 11 in Constanța coastal area, Prahova (4), Vâlcea (4), Brașov (3) and Suceava (3). Of the 41 resorts, 11 are in the plain and hilly areas and only 4 in the high mountain areas (Buşteni, Predeal, Sinaia and Voineasa). Other 48 local-interest resorts are mainly distributed in 22 counties (Fig. 9.1; Table 9.5), the largest being in Harghita (6), Brașov (4), Caras-Severin (4), Cluj (4), Vâlcea (4), Bihor (3), Prahova (3), etc.

Table 9.5 Romania. Resort types in 2015 (Source Law 432/2003; Law 1222/2002; Romanian Official Monitor no 770/23.10.2002, www.mdlpr.ro, 2015)

9.6 Main Types of Tourism

Rural tourism

After the fall of the socialist system and under the impulse of financial support programmes from Western Europe, rural tourism has increasingly become a chance to revitalize rural areas and to promote and capitalize cultural and ethnographic heritage with a unique character. Generally, localities that develop in this direction enjoy a picturesque and unpolluted natural environment hold great ethnographic values and maintain the local architecture and traditions. The Carpathian region is now concentrating the largest number of agro-touristic boarding houses scattered in over 110 localities (Ciangă 2006, p. 156) in regions such as Maramureș, Bucovina, Neamț, Rucăr-Bran, the Apuseni Mountains and Sibiu. These establishments appear in the lowlands with attractive tourist resources especially in the coastal area and the Danube Delta. At county level, the most representative in terms of polarizing accommodation units are the agro-touristic boarding houses type (Ciangă 2006, p. 156) in regions such as Maramureș (78 units in 2012) with 25 localities (Botiza, Vadu Izei, Ieud, Breb, etc.) and over 800 beds; Brașov (260 units in 2012) with 10 localities (Moeciu, Bran, Şirnea) and over 1100 beds; Suceava (130 units in 2014) with 11 localities (Vama, Iacobeni, Moldovita, Voroneț, etc.) and more than 350 beds; Bistriţa-Năsăud (55 units in 2012) with 9 localities (Lunca Ilvei, Prundu Bârgăului, etc.) and over 200 beds; Covasna (39 units in 2012) with 10 localities (Balvanyoş, Cernat) and more than 100 beds; and Vrancea (Lepşa, Soveja), Sibiu (Sibiel). A high concentration is in Harghita (179 units in 2012) where two localities (Praid, Lăzarea) have over 240 beds and Alba (61 units in 2012) with three localities (Arieşeni, Gârda, Albac) and over 230 beds, Cluj (92 units in 2012) (Sâncrai-Poieni, Bologa), Neamț (100 units in 2012), and Argeș (88 units in 2012). Most households provide generally between 6 and 10 beds; nonetheless, there are many situations in which they host groups of up to 20 people.

Mountain tourism

Mountain tourism in Romania holds about 30% of the country surface occupied by mountain units with a wide genetic, petrographic, morphological variety and with altitudes reaching 2500 m. The natural environment provides optimal conditions for treatment, hiking and winter sports within ski resorts or areas. At the same time, a large number of spas and climatic resorts are concentrated in the mountains. Active tourism for winter sports is based on climatic resorts in the mountain area where there are about 27 authorized ski areas with about 80 approved ski slopes (Master Plan 2007, p. 29) and equipped with specific infrastructure. The length of the season is between 3 and 5 months, also supported by artificial snow. Prevailing demand is on weekends, and the most attractive tourist destination for foreign tourists is Poiana Brașov and Prahova Valley. For hiking, there are about 300 authorized hiking trails whose length ranges from 1-h walk to a 20-h walk. Within parks and mountain reserves, there are over 340 marked trails, the most numerous being in Bucegi (40), Apuseni (32); Domogled-Cerna Valley (35), Piatra Craiului (31), etc. (Master Plan, 2007, p. 31), as well as the horse riding centres in the counties of Cluj, Mureş, Sibiu, Suceava, Braşov and Bistrița-Năsăud (Master Plan 2007, p. 32).

Leisure tourism

Leisure tourism can develop in a picturesque and diversified milieu with a specific bioclimate and a refreshing microclimate, with opportunities to practise year-round recreational activities. A diversity of tourist forms ranges from leisure tourism in the mountainous and hilly regions to weekend tourism and health tourism.

Health tourism

It is based on thermal and mineral springs, mud and mud pits which have triggered the set-up of 117 localities with natural therapeutic factors of which 41 are national-interest ranked spas and 48 local (Table 9.5). In 2012, there were 488 accommodation establishments (8.3% from total in Romania) in the spas touristic destination, 13% of the accommodation places (39,279) and 13.4% (9.9 million places-days) of the capacity in operation of which only 3% are for foreign tourists and 9% in 3–5-star units. An important aspect is determined by the income of spas from sources in the form of social support from the state.

Seaside tourism

Seaside tourism with a potential determined by the 245 km of coastline on the Black Sea is currently the most important area of concentration of the accommodation establishments (676 in 2012; 11.6%), with about 26.8% of the accommodation places in 2012, especially within hotels, villas and bungalows. Most of them have a reduced period of operation of 3–4 months during the summer season and are concentrated in traditional resorts and in Constanța.

Cruises on the Danube

It is a recent alternative, and their frequency increased after 1995, in 2007, with over a thousand cruises, lasting up to 4 days. A proof in this sense is the number of beds and tourists who have appealed to this type of tourism.

Conferences and trade fairs (tourism)

A fast-growing trend can be encountered in case of conferences and trade fairs (tourism), by the increasing number of places and conference rooms. Of the 835 existing rooms in 2006 about 35% (290) were concentrated in Bucharest (Master Plan 2007, p. 36).

The itinerant tourism with cultural valences

It is determined by the value of cultural sights of interest, their density on the ground and their accession by the existing ways. It is proposed to include these localities on routes and tours to allow a better knowledge of the historical monuments, the archaeological sites and the ethnographic values and to highlight the specific cultural landscape of each area, stretching from the mountains to plains (area with high hills and mountains with rural settlements that have preserved the original matrix, the hills with vineyards, orchards and monasteries, the urban areas situated at the foot of the hills, plains with large mansions and boyar estates and princely residences, etc.). Among the thematic routes, we refer to the road of wine, the road of salt, the road of Cantacuziene family mansions and the road of the voivodes. There is a national government programme called Romania—the country of wines which aims to attract an increased number of tourists from Romania and also from abroad. Other routes target the road of fruit which, similar to the road of wine, aim at capitalizing the Carpathian region and other areas covered with orchards. Wine tourism in Romania is suitable because of a situation caused by seven major wine regions with 9 famous vineyards such as Murfatlar, Jidvei, Panciu, Bucium, Recaş etc., and 7 museums of wine, each offering itineraries and wine tasting for visitors. The road of wine is an ambitious project supported by the government which was implemented first in Alba County, Transylvania.

Hunting and fishing tourism

Hunting and fishing tourism is based on the planning of hunting and fishing areas with an increased potential and represents one of the priority directions of the development of regional tourism. It is proposed for this purpose to set up/upgrade some small-scale accommodation establishments (forest chalets) and create a network of technical assistance tailored to the hunting and fishing tourism. This type of tourism must take place under a strict control meant to ensure the preservation of the hunting and fishing stock. The total area of hunting plots in 2005 was of about 21 million ha (Master Plan 2007, p. 33) distributed predominantly in the lowlands (42%), followed by the hilly areas (37.2%) and the mountain areas (20.8%). The main game species in Romania are the chamois, the deer, the red stag, the hare, the wolf, the lynx, the wild boar, the wildcat, the bear, the fox and bird species (ducks and pheasants). In 2005, the number of foreign hunters was 8000. There are also 645 officially identified sport fishing locations, and the number of foreign tourists in 2005 was 1000 for angling, especially in the Danube Delta.

9.7 The Major Tourist Regions of Romania

The specialized literature shows numerous geographical works that addressed the tourist regionalization of the Romanian territory. Among these, we mention Ciangă (1998) for the Eastern Carpathians and Romania (Ciangă 2006; Cocean 1997, Cocean et al. 2002) with 14 regions, Cândea et al. using as landmarks the value of the tourist potential and the tourism infrastructure outlining 32 regions; Surd (2008) for the Romanian Carpathians, etc. To these, we can add the Lands (Cocean 2011), genuine oasis for the preservation of the traditional folk architecture and customs. Most of them have a common element that “tends to overlap the tourist establishments over the physical and geographical units” (Cocean et al. 2002, p. 297). Following the same authors (Cocean et al. 2002), based on the extension, the attractive potential, the profile infrastructure and the degree of specialization, Romania is divided into 14 tourist regions (Fig. 9.21):

• The Western Plain and Hills—defined mixed tourism, health and cultural tourism and leisure as auxiliary,

• Oaş-Maramureş-Bucovina, with a prevailing attractive natural potential attraction but supplemented with specific man-made elements,

• The Apuseni Mountains by the geographical individualization, the spatial extension, the diversity of natural attractions and the existence of some exceptional human resources are framed within the sphere of leisure tourism, the health and cultural tourism, where agro-tourism has considerable prospects,

• The Transylvanian Depression as a functional unit clearly inscribed within the Carpathian range stands out by the predominantly cultural tourism supplemented by the leisure one,

• The Poiana Ruscă Mountains clearly individualized boast a dominant cultural tourism completed at leisure,

• The predominantly recreational feature of the Banat Mountains (mountain hiking, canoeing, swimming, fishing, hunting, speleology, climbing) completed by rural tourism (with ethnographic resources) in the area of rural settlements,

• The central group of the Eastern Carpathians and sub-Carpathians of Moldova is characterized by the intermingling of the three types of tourism: leisure, cultural and health which trigger vast territories’ composite and versatile one,

• Moldavian Plateau reveals almost an exclusive dependence on cultural tourism, to which curative and transit tourism can be added,

• The Curvature Carpathians emerge through leisure, cultural and health tourism,

• The Southern Carpathians represent the highest Carpathian sector, being predestined to a diversified leisure tourism and secondly by health and transit tourism,

• The Getic sub-Carpathians with a tourist function divided between cultural and health resources,

• The Romanian Plain with leisure tourism and health in the area of the heath but where Bucharest remains a polarizing tourist area,

• The plateau of Dobroudja with mixed tourism, health and leisure and summer entertainment in the area, an important role being given by the Black Sea Coast and Constanta city,

• The Danube Delta is the first-ranked tourist region, reserve of the biosphere being a typical region for leisure tourism, scientific based on entertainment, fishing, hunting and nautical activities.

In conclusion, each element of the natural environment is basic for the emergence, development and diversification of the anthropogenic component, leading to a tourist potential whose value increases from plains to hills and mountains. A situation marked by originality and specificity is the tourist system formed of the Black Sea and the Danube Delta. On the backdrop of an exceptional natural environmental human resources consisting of archaeological sites, historical buildings, architectural and art establishments, museums and memorial houses, testimonies of civilization and popular culture through elements of ethnography, the villages and the tourist resorts boost the tourist valences of these areas facilitating the outline and development of a wide range of forms of tourism: leisure and health, hunting, rural, cultural, scientific, mountain, etc.

Based on the SWOT analysis elaborated at the Master Plan, the strengths of Romania as a tourist destination are: the Carpathian Mountains with a petrographic morphological and landscape variety; the Danube River and the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve, the diversity of national parks and protected areas representing 7% of the country’s territory; the Black Sea Coast; the tourist caving potential, the diversity of flora and fauna, the diversity and large number of mineral and thermal springs; the temperate continental climate; the natural environment conducive to tourism activities like skiing, hiking, horse riding, cycling, water sports etc.; diversity of heritage tourist sights (UNESCO); the Dacian and medieval cities; rural settlements with their traditional style; diversified museums; traditions and folklore festivals, the legend of Dracula, Sibiu—the cultural capital of Europe in 2007, Cluj-Napoca – youth capital of Europe in 2014 etc. The main tourist regions are the Black Sea coast, the Danube Delta, Bucharest, Transylvania, Bucovina and Maramureș. The main current tourist development has four main directions: tourism on the Black Sea Coast, spa tourism in many regions of the country with mineral springs, cultural/heritage tourism based on Saxon and medieval buildings in Transylvania and in the north of the county (Maramureș and Bucovina), and business tourism in Bucharest and other urban centres. In addition, there are a number of small and medium enterprises which activate the production market for ecotourism and geotourism, mainly in rural and agricultural communities.