📈
78%
Romania vs EU Average
GDP/capita in PPS as % of EU average in 2023
Up from 26% in 2000 · Held at 78% in 2024
Fastest convergence in CEEBack to publications
Policy ReportJune 2025
Regional Purchasing Power and Election Results
The recent presidential elections — with a close result for the two options for Romania's future — have shown the existence of a real social cleavage. The degree of economic development in the counties partially explains the result of the votes cast.
By Ella Kállai, Co-founder · Consilium Policy Advisors Group · office@cpag.ro · www.cpag.ro
🚀
2.9×
National Convergence Multiplier
Romanian GDP/capita grew this much faster than the EU average
Bulgaria 2.2× · Poland 1.6× · Hungary 1.4×
CEE regional leader⚠️
4.1×
Internal Regional Gap
Richest vs poorest region GDP/capita ratio in 2023
Was 3.1× in 2000 · 4.1× in 2023
Largest internal gap in the region🗳️
64%
"Change" Votes from Lagging Counties
Share from counties with below-average GDP growth
From counties where GDP/capita grew slower than the country
Real social cleavage♻️
3.7→2.5
Redistribution Impact
Income max/min ratio: primary vs disposable (2022)
Mitigation greater in Romania than in countries in the region
Largest reduction in the regionReport Sections
Five sections · 2000–2023 · Source: own calculations based on INSEE and Eurostat data
📊
Section 01
Romania's Real Convergence
The highest degree of real convergence in the last quarter of a century
GDP/capita in PPS from the EU average increased from 26% in 2000 to 78% in 2023, meaning GDP/capita grew 2.9 times faster than GDP per capita in the EU. The growth varied between 1.9 and 3.8 times across counties. Counties with low GDP/capita in 2000 tended to remain with low GDP/capita in 2023. From the counties where the GDP/capita grew slower than the country, 64% of the voters for change came.
🗺️
Section 02
Regional Disparities
Growing differences, the largest gap in the region
GDP/capita in PPS was 3.1 times higher in the richest region than the poorest in 2000 and 4.1 times higher in 2023. Regions with GDP/capita around 70% of the EU average (Center, North-West, West) and Bucharest-Ilfov voted to keep the European path. North East (46%), South East (61%), South (60%), South West (62%) voted for change. The North-East remained behind 10 years compared to developed regions.
🏭
Section 03
Productivity & Investment
Persistent concentration in high-productivity regions
Discrepancies in GDP/capita between regions are maintained by discrepancies in labour productivity, which explain the spatial location of investments. The persistent agglomeration of investments in the Bucharest-Ilfov region (37% in 2000, 44% in 2022), the only region where investments per capita exceeded the national average (almost 4 times), is explained by productivity almost double the national average. In regions with higher productivity, voters' choice was to continue the European path.
♻️
Section 04
Revenue Redistribution
Partial reduction of gaps through public policies
In Romania, the ratio between the regional maximum primary income per capita and the regional minimum was 3.7; following the redistribution it became 2.5 in 2022. The mitigation of regional differences through redistribution was greater in Romania compared to the other countries in the region. The regions where the vote for change was in the majority are the regions where the disposable income of households per capita was 80% of the average level per country.
✅
Section 05
Conclusions & Top Recommendation
Prioritising investments in lagging areas
Private investments followed the logic of productivity, concentrating in the already advanced regions, especially in Bucharest-Ilfov. Redistribution through public policies has partially reduced the gaps but has failed to compensate for differences in productivity and investment. Priority should be given to investments in areas that have to recover consistent gaps to support growth and repair weakened social cohesion.
Main Findings
Key insights from the regional economic and electoral analysis
1
A real social cleavage
The recent presidential elections have shown the existence of a real social cleavage. The degree of economic development in the counties partially explains the result of the votes cast. The inhabitants of counties lagging behind, with a lower GDP/capita (below half of the EU average), mostly opted for changing the European path. From the counties where the GDP/capita grew slower than the country, 64% of the voters for change came.
2
Highest real convergence, but growing internal disparities
Romania achieved the highest degree of real convergence in the last quarter of a century compared to the countries in the region, with GDP/capita in PPS from the EU average increasing from 26% in 2000 to 78% in 2023. However, GDP/capita in PPS compared to the EU average was 3.1 times higher in the richest region compared to the poorest region in 2000 and 4.1 times higher in 2023. Regional differences are increasing compared to countries in the area.
3
Eight truly winning counties
In 2022, compared to 2000, in 12 counties GDP/capita grew faster than the national average. In 4 (Dolj, Tulcea, Teleorman, Salaj) the reason was the population decrease faster than at the country level (−15%). In the other 8 truly winning counties (Alba, Bucharest, Cluj, Gorj, Maramureș, Prahova, Timiș, Sibiu), the faster advance of GDP/capita was due to the faster growth of GDP than the average growth per country (average annual rate of 14%).
4
Persistent agglomeration of investment in Bucharest-Ilfov
In the last quarter of a century, investments have been located in regions that initially had a high productivity. The persistent agglomeration of investments in the Bucharest-Ilfov region (37% in 2000, 44% in 2022), the only region where investments per capita exceeded the national average (almost 4 times), is explained by productivity almost double the national average.
5
Redistribution reduces gaps but does not compensate
The Bucharest-Ilfov region was a net payer of taxes and social contributions throughout 2000–2022, the average annual value being equivalent to 2.4% of GDP. The population in the region lost income representing 17% of primary income in that period. The North-East region received 0.9% of GDP annually (8.4% of regional GDP) contributing to the increase of primary income per capita by an average of 14%. The mitigation of regional differences through redistribution was greater in Romania compared to the other countries in the region.
6
Remote work effect did not reduce disparities in Romania
The Covid effect of the spread of remote work especially in highly skilled sectors and occupations that allowed firms and employees to relocate from large urban agglomerations to the periphery interrupted the increase in discrepancies in Bulgaria, the Czech Republic and Poland, but not in Romania and Hungary.
Regions: GDP/capita and Electoral Outcome
GDP/capita in PPS as % of EU average (2023) · Majority vote in May 2025 presidential election
| Region | GDP/capita (% EU avg, 2023) | Disposable income vs national avg | % votes for EU path | Electoral majority |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bucharest–Ilfov | 191% | almost twice national avg | 67.0% | 🇪🇺 European Path |
| Center | 70% | ≈ national avg | 66.7% | 🇪🇺 European Path |
| North-West | 71% | ≈ national avg | 62.3% | 🇪🇺 European Path |
| West | 78% | +10% above national avg | 51.3% | 🇪🇺 European Path |
| South-West | 62% | ~80% national avg | 45.7% | ↩ Change |
| South | 60% | ~80% national avg | 47.2% | ↩ Change |
| South-East | 61% | ~80% national avg | 48.9% | ↩ Change |
| North-East | 46% | ~80% national avg | 49.6% | ↩ Change |
Note: The figures in the column indicate the percentage of votes for the president (European path candidate). Source: own calculations based on Eurostat and INS data · Electoral data: Central Electoral Bureau (May 2025)
Regional Inequality Across CEE Countries
Richest-to-poorest region GDP/capita ratio · 2000 vs 2023 · Source: Eurostat
Bulgaria
1.8 → 2.5
↑ Widening
Czechia
2.5 → 3.0
↑ Widening
Hungary
3.1 → 3.5
↑ Widening
Poland
3.0 → 2.9
↓ Narrowing
Romania
3.1 → 4.1
⚠ Largest in CEE
🇪🇺 European Path Regions
Center, North-West, West and Bucharest-Ilfov — voted to keep the European path
Regions that voted to continue the European path — Bucharest–Ilfov (191% of EU average), West (78%), North-West (71%) and Center (70%) — all had disposable household income at or well above the national average. Bucharest–Ilfov was a net payer of taxes and social contributions throughout 2000–2022, equivalent to 2.4% of GDP annually, causing the population to lose income representing 17% of primary income over that period. The North-West, Central and West regions became net payers since 2013, with amounts paid annually representing 0.2% of GDP.
↩ Change Regions
Below 62% of EU average GDP/capita
Regions that voted for change — North-East (46%), South-East (61%), South (60%) and South-West (62%) — had household disposable income at approximately 80% of the national average. The North-East is 10 years behind developed regions and is the only region where the convergence gap widened between 2000 and 2023. South-East, South and South-West remained 5 years behind even though in 2000 the level of GDP/capita was comparable. These regions received net social benefits: the North-East 0.9% of GDP annually (8.4% of regional GDP, +14% income), South-East 0.3% of GDP (2.8% of regional GDP, +4% income), South 0.6% of GDP (4.9% of regional GDP) and South-West 0.4% of GDP (5.1% of regional GDP) — contributing to income increases averaging 9%.
Income Redistribution Across CEE (2000 vs 2022)
Ratio of regional max to min per capita income · Before and after public redistribution
Primary Income Max/Min Ratio
Before redistribution · Higher = more unequal
| Country | 2000 | 2022 | Direction |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bulgaria | 1.9 | 2.5 | ↑ Worse |
| Czech Rep. | 1.6 | 1.5 | ↓ Better |
| Hungary | 2.7 | 2.3 | ↓ Better |
| Poland | 2.3 | 1.8 | ↓ Better |
| Romania | 3.1 | 3.7 | ↑ Largest gap |
Disposable Income Max/Min Ratio
After redistribution · Measures policy effectiveness
| Country | 2000 | 2022 | Reduction from Primary |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bulgaria | 1.6 | 1.8 | 2.5 → 1.8 |
| Czech Rep. | 1.5 | 1.4 | 1.5 → 1.4 |
| Hungary | 2.3 | 2.2 | 2.3 → 2.2 |
| Poland | 1.8 | 1.6 | 1.8 → 1.6 |
| Romania | 2.2 | 2.5 | 3.7 → 2.5 ✓ Largest reduction |
Conclusions
Prioritising investments in lagging areas
Main causes of regional divergence
- — Counties with low GDP/capita in 2000 tended to remain with low GDP/capita in 2023
- — Investments have been located in regions that initially had high productivity, contributing to maintaining the differences
- — The Covid effect of remote work interrupted the increase in discrepancies in Bulgaria, the Czech Republic and Poland, but not in Romania and Hungary
- — Redistribution through public policies has partially reduced the gaps but has failed to compensate for differences in productivity and investment
Summary of findings
- — Romania achieved the highest degree of real convergence in the last quarter of a century compared to countries in the region — GDP/capita in PPS increased from 26% to 78% of the EU average between 2000 and 2023
- — The mitigation of regional differences through redistribution was greater in Romania compared to the other countries in the region — max/min ratio of disposable income is 2.5 compared to 3.7 for primary income
- — There is a strong correlation between the level of county/regional economic development and the electoral option
Top Recommendation
Now, with the reanalysis of public spending, priority should be given to investments in areas that have to recover consistent gaps. Such a strategy would not only benefit the overall evolution due to the great potential for growth of the areas left behind, but would repair over time the weakened social cohesion that endangers political stability.