FERM 2025 | Ion Ștefanovici and Iulian Safir on the Challenges and Opportunities Related to the Absorption of European and Governmental Funds in Romania and the Republic of Moldova

REGIONAL ECONOMIC FORUM MOLDOVA 2025

19th Edition – Vatra Dornei, July 9–13, 2025

Thematic Panel:

European and Governmental Funds: Opportunities, Challenges, and Cross-Border Cooperation

Speakers:

Ion Ștefanovici, President of CAPDR / Iulian Safir, Deputy General Director of the Familia Safir group of companies

Presentation Topic:
“Challenges and Solutions for Accessing European Funds in Romania and the Republic of Moldova in the Context of Administrative Reforms and Cross-Border Cooperation”

Within the Regional Economic Forum Moldova 2025, held in Vatra Dornei, a substantive debate took place focusing on European and governmental funds, with the central theme “Opportunities, Challenges, and Cross-Border Cooperation.”

Panel II of the event brought together key actors from Romania and the Republic of Moldova: experts in legal consultancy and European funds, representatives of public administration, and business leaders.

---

Key voices included Sergiu Bivol, lawyer, partner and coordinator of Vernon│David office in Chișinău, Ion Ștefanovici, President of the Center for Regional Development Analysis and Planning (CAPDR), and Iulian Safir, Deputy General Director of the Familia Safir group of companies. The discussion, initiated by a direct question regarding successful models in Poland and Hungary, offered a comprehensive overview of current dysfunctions and prospects for the 2024–2030 programming period.

Absorption of European Funds: Between Potential and Systemic Blockages

The question raised by Sergiu Bivol set the framework for a relevant debate on both sides of the Prut River:

“According to European Union statistics, leaders in European fund absorption are Poland and Hungary. Romania ranks lower. What should we do in the Republic of Moldova, based on your public and private experience, to avoid repeating the same mistakes?”

This issue allowed participants to address structural themes related to governance, consultancy, the functioning of development agencies, and regional economic strategies.

Development Agencies (ADR): Between Facilitator Role and Institutional Blockage

Ion Ștefanovici highlighted one of the most serious dysfunctions in the fund access mechanism in the Republic of Moldova: the design and functioning of Regional Development Agencies (ADR). Instead of acting as entities that allocate funds through open calls, as is the case in Romania or other European countries, Moldovan ADRs simultaneously serve as implementer, controller, and beneficiary, creating severe institutional overlaps and confusion.

“ADRs in the Republic of Moldova are not structures endowed with capital that then distribute it competitively. They are the ones implementing projects. It is an illogical and deeply restrictive situation. There is no clarity in processes, and for a consultant from Romania, the Moldovan mechanisms are impossible to understand.”

The problem becomes even more acute given the lack of genuine openness to external consultancy or cross-border collaborations:

“I proposed to mayors and ministries to come to Romania, to organize meetings with consultancy firms. No progress. It seems that systemic clarification is not desired.”

Romania – The Model of Excessive Bureaucracy

If the Republic of Moldova suffers from institutional confusion, Romania is still trapped in excessive bureaucracy, experts note. Based on his own experience, Ștefanovici illustrated how ADR North-East became an example of a structure overwhelmed by its own procedures:

“There are a million documents requested from you overnight. Even accounting documents. Things impossible to produce in 5 days. This was one of the reasons why I decided to ideologically withdraw from relations with ADR management and follow my own strategy.”

These observations are further reinforced by Iulian Safir, who shared the tough but realistic perspective of the business environment:

“You cannot submit a 400-page dossier for funding. In Poland, if it exceeds 40 pages, it is automatically rejected. There, the mechanism is simplified, efficient, and functional. We have unnecessarily complicated the entire process.”

Funding the Future: Financial Instruments Instead of Grants

A major theme raised by Ștefanovici was changing the funding mechanism starting in 2028, when Romania might shift from non-reimbursable funding to financial instruments:

“Until now, the beneficiary contribution was 30%, with the EU covering 70%. The situation will reverse. The beneficiary will have to cover 70%, and the EU will cover the rest. This means credit, thus a functional banking system adapted to SMEs. Romania is not ready.”

This change pressures authorities to rethink the entire support infrastructure, including the relationship between the state, commercial banks, and professional consultancy.

Administrative-Territorial Reform – Poland’s Ignored Lesson

One of the pillars of Poland’s success in absorbing European funds was territorial reform. Ion Ștefanovici emphasized that this theme, although publicly mentioned in Romania, has never been politically assumed:

“In Poland, there were two attempts at administrative reorganization. They acknowledged their mistakes, corrected them, and moved forward. They divided the country into functional regions – voivodeships – and created a highly flexible implementation mechanism. Romania has not had the courage to carry out this reform.”

The lack of reform also blocked direct negotiation with the European Commission for less developed regions:

“We do not have access to real negotiations with Brussels. We do not understand the ‘Brusselese,’ we do not know what is discussed behind the scenes. Why can certain lines be funded in the West region and not in the North-East? Who decides the differences?”

Entrepreneurial Strategy: Business Plan Before Funds

Iulian Safir also offered a lesson in economic pragmatism:

“We create a solid business plan. If the investment amortization takes 5–6 years, we fund it ourselves. We do not wait for European funds. We cannot afford the uncertainty. For example, our new protein flour factory, worth 30 million euros, will be launched without a single euro from funds. Whether funds come or not – it is too risky to rely on them.”

Conclusions: Between Best Practices and Institutional Will

Discussions within Panel II of the Regional Economic Forum Moldova 2025 highlighted several critical aspects:

• The Republic of Moldova needs reform of ADRs and openness to cross-border partnerships.

• Romania must reduce excessive bureaucracy and accelerate administrative-territorial reform as a prerequisite for effective fund absorption.

• Both public institutions and the private sector must prepare for the shift to financial instruments in the next European budgetary cycle.

• The Polish model remains a benchmark for administrative efficiency, political courage, and risk-taking.

CAPDR reaffirms its commitment to supporting these strategic directions through active dialogue, critical analysis, and promoting an effective framework for action, in partnership with local authorities, central administration, the business environment, and specialized consultants.