DOCSLIB.ORG

Republic of Moldova

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Republic of Moldova PUBLIC ACCESS TO INFORMATION & ICTs PHASE II REPORT Republic of Moldova Prepared for the University of Washington, Center for Information & Society. Institute for Polling and Marketing (IPM-Georgia); OPINIA, Independent Sociological and Information Service (Moldova) 8, Baratashvili Str., 0105, Tbilisi, Georgia Tel: +995 32 99 72 14 (ext.102) Mob: +995 93 90 01 03 Fax: +995 32 99 85 06 E-mail: [email protected] Final Report: August 15, 2008 University of Washington Center for Information & Society 4311 11th Avenue NE, Suite 400 Box354985 Seattle, WA 98195 USA www.cis.washington.edu [email protected] © 2008 University of Washington Center for Information & Society (CIS). The views expressed in this report are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the University of Washington or CIS. Recommended citation: OPINIA, Independent Sociological and Information Service (2008). Public access to information & ICTs: Moldova. Public Access Landscape Study final report, presented to University of Washington Center for Information & Society (CIS), Seattle. ii Table of Contents The table of contents is generated automatically. Right-click on it and select “update field” to update page numbers. 1 Extended Executive Summary ........................................................................................... 1 1.1 Research Project Overview ................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Country Overview ................................................................................................................. 1 1.4 Research Rationale, Sample, and Methods............................................................................ 3 1.5 Information Needs of Underserved Communities ................................................................. 4 1.6 Strengths, Weaknesses, and Opportunities in Key Public Access Venues ............................... 5 1.7 Salient Findings ..................................................................................................................... 6 1.8 Key Recommendations ......................................................................................................... 8 2 Methodology .................................................................................................................... 9 2.1 Venue Selection .................................................................................................................... 9 2.1.1 Venues studied ........................................................................................................................................ 9 2.1.1 Other experiences of public access to information that are not quite “venues” .................................. 10 2.1.2 Other existing public access venues, not included in this study ............................................................ 11 2.2 Inequity Variables ............................................................................................................... 12 2.2.1 Socio‐economic status ........................................................................................................................... 12 2.2.2 Educational level .................................................................................................................................... 12 2.2.3 Age ......................................................................................................................................................... 13 2.2.4 Gender ................................................................................................................................................... 13 2.2.5 Location ................................................................................................................................................. 13 2.2.6 Other inequity variables ........................................................................................................................ 14 2.3 Data Gathering Techniques ................................................................................................. 14 2.3.1 Literature review ................................................................................................................................... 14 2.3.1.1 Most useful bibliography: ............................................................................................................. 14 2.3.2 Individual interviews .............................................................................................................................. 15 2.3.3 Group interviews and focus groups ....................................................................................................... 15 2.3.4 Site visits ................................................................................................................................................ 16 2.3.5 Surveys ................................................................................................................................................... 16 2.3.6 Other data gathering techniques ........................................................................................................... 17 2.3.7 Most useful contacts ............................................................................................................................. 17 2.4 Research Trustworthiness and Credibility ........................................................................... 18 2.4.1 Research limitations .............................................................................................................................. 18 2.4.2 Team qualifications ................................................................................................................................ 18 3 Country Assessment ....................................................................................................... 20 iii 3.1 Overall Country Assessment ............................................................................................... 20 3.2 Real Access Framework ....................................................................................................... 20 3.2.1 Access .................................................................................................................................................... 21 3.2.2 Capacity ................................................................................................................................................. 21 3.2.3 Environment .......................................................................................................................................... 22 3.3 Information Needs of Underserved Communities ............................................................... 22 3.3.1 Information sources ............................................................................................................................... 24 3.3.2 Key barriers to accessing the information that underserved communities need ................................. 24 3.3.3 Ways users experience different types of public access venues ........................................................... 25 3.3.4 Inequity environment in the country ..................................................................................................... 25 3.3.5 Freedom of press and expression and the right to information ............................................................ 26 3.4 Charts: Information Needs, Users, and Uses ........................................................................ 26 3.4.1.1 Users, by type of venue................................................................................................................. 27 3.4.1.2 Information People Seek, by type of venue .................................................................................. 29 3.4.1.3 Uses of ICT, by type of venue ........................................................................................................ 30 3.4.1.4 Frequency of Use for each type of venue ..................................................................................... 31 3.4.1.5 Barriers to use for each type of venue .......................................................................................... 32 3.4.2 Salient initiatives to help meet critical information needs by underserved communities .................... 33 3.4.2.1 Past initiatives: .............................................................................................................................. 33 3.4.2.2 Ongoing initiatives: ....................................................................................................................... 33 3.4.2.3 Historical trends and opportunities to serve information needs .................................................. 33 3.4.2.4 Planned initiatives: ........................................................................................................................ 34 3.5 Economic, Policy, and Regulatory Environment ................................................................... 34 3.5.1 National and local economic environment ............................................................................................ 34 3.5.2 National and local policy (legal and regulatory) environment .............................................................. 35
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Evaluation of Forest Ecosystem Services (FES) in the Republic of Moldova
    Evaluation of Forest Ecosystem Services (FES) in the Republic of Moldova July 2015 This publication has been produced with the assistance of the European Union. The content, findings, interpretations, and con clusions of this publication are the sole responsibility of the FLEG II (ENPI East) Programme Team ( www.enpi-fleg.org) and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Union. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the Implementin g Organizations. Technical Report: Evaluation of Forest Ecosystem Services (FES) in the Republic of Moldova Prepared by: Transilvania University of Brașov (TUB) Faculty of Silviculture and Forest Engineering The material in this publication is copyrighted. Any copying or transmitting portions of information without permission may be a violation of applicable law. The author encourages dissemination of this work and will normally grant permission to reproduce portions of this report. The interest and willingness of Moldovan forestry and environment protection sectors as well as other key stakeholders to actively engage in collaboration with the Transilvania University of Brașov team on a diverse range of topics is gratefully acknowledged. We render thanks to all stakeholders from forestry, water management, agriculture, and tourism sectors as well as to local public administrations and academia who actively participated in consultations undertaken by the TUB Team in predicting the evolution of variables for the two alternative scenarios, collecting data and applying the valuation techniques. Photos: Transilvania University of Brașov, ENPI FLEG Design: Transilvania University of Brașov & Amedia July 2015 TRANSILVANIA UNIVERSITY FROM BRASOV FACULTY OF SILVICULTURE AND FOREST ENGINEERING 1 Sirul Beethoven - BRAŞOV 500123 www.unitbv.ro/silvic Content Introduction ..........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • WCC Moldova Partnership Program Report on Activities for 2003-2004
    WCC Moldova Partnership Program Report on activities for 2003-2004 Chisinau, 2005 Content I. BACKGROUND INFORMATION .................................................................................................. 3 1. SOCIO-ECONOMIC SITUATION ........................................................................................................... 3 2. POPULATION ................................................................................................................................ 4 3. CHURCHES REPRESENTED ........................................................................................................ 4 II. MOLDOVA PARTNERSHIP PROGRAMME ............................................................................. 7 1. BRIEF HISTORY OVERVIEW ...................................................................................................... 7 2. MOLDOVAN PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM INITIATIVES 2003-2004. ..................................... 10 III. SUMMARY OF PROJECT REPORTS ..................................................................................... 17 1. SOCIAL PROTECTION HUB ...................................................................................................... 17 BACKGROUND INFORMATION ............................................................................................................. 17 PARTNERS’ INITIATIVES IMPLEMENTED: ............................................................................................. 18 MO/002 -Soup Kitchen for elderly people ...................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Datele De Contact Ale Serviciilor Teritoriale De Relaţii Cu Beneficiarii Ale CNAM
    Datele de contact ale serviciilor teritoriale de relaţii cu beneficiarii ale CNAM Unitatea teritorial- Nr.d administrativă Adresa Telefon Programul de /o deservită lucru 1. Anenii Noi or. Anenii Noi, str. Uzinelor, nr. 30/1, bir. 38 0(265)2-21-10 08.00-17.00 (clădirea Centrului de Sănătate) pauza: 12.00-13.00 2. Basarabeasca or. Basarabeasca, str. Karl Marx, nr. 55 0(297)2-12-67 (clădirea Consiliului Raional) 08.00-17.00 pauza: 12.00-13.00 3. Bălți AT Nord a CNAM, mun. Bălți, str. Sfîntul 0(231)6-33-99 Nicolae, nr. 5A 08.00-17.00 pauza: 12.00-13.00 4. Briceni or. Briceni, str. Eminescu, nr. 48, et. 1 0(247)2-57-64 (clădirea Centrului de Sănătate) 08.00-17.00 pauza: 12.00-13.00 5. Cahul AT Sud a CNAM, or. Cahul, str. Ștefan cel 0(299)2-29-15 Mare, nr. 16 08.00-17.00 pauza: 12.00-13.00 6. Cantemir or. Cantemir, str. N.Testemiţanu, nr. 22, bir. 0(273)2-32-65 405 (clădirea Centrului de Sănătate) 08.00-17.00 pauza: 12.00-13.00 7. Călăraşi or. Călăraşi, str. Bojole, nr. 1, bir. 13 0(244)2-03-51 (clădirea Centrului de Sănătate) 08.00-17.00 pauza: 12.00-13.00 8. Căușeni AT Est a CNAM, or. Căușeni, str. Iurie 0(243)2-65-03 08.00-17.00 Gagarin, nr. 54 pauza: 12.00-13.00 9. Ceadîr-Lunga or. Ceadîr-Lunga, str. Miciurin, nr. 4 0(291)2-80-40 (clădirea Centrului de Sănătate) 08.00-17.00 pauza: 12.00-13.00 10.
    [Show full text]
  • Local Integration Project for Belarus, Moldova and Ukraine
    LOCAL INTEGRATION PROJECT FOR BELARUS, MOLDOVA AND UKRAINE 2011-2013 Implemented by the United Nations High Funded by the European Union Commissioner for Refugees 12 June 2012 Refugees to receive apartments under EU/UNHCR scheme CHISINAU, Moldova, June 12 (UNHCR) – Four apartments rehabilitated to shelter refugees fleeing human rights abuse and conflict in their home countries have been given today to local authorities in Razeni, Ialoveni District by the office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) following extensive rehabilitation works co-funded by the EU/UNHCR under the Local Integration Project (LIP) for refugees. Refugee families from Armenia, Azerbaijan and Palestine received ceremonial keys at today’s hand-over ceremony. Razeni Mayor Ion Cretu hosted Deputy Minister Ana Vasilachi (Ministry of Labour, Social Protection and the Family), Deputy Minister Iurie Cheptanaru (Ministry of Internal Affairs), Ambassador of the European Union Dirk Schübel and other dignitaries. Tuesday’s ceremony at the long-disused kindergarten follows a similar event in March when UNHCR formally handed over apartments at a former public bathhouse in Mereni, Anenii Noi District to shelter refugees from Armenia, Russia and Sudan. “Without the enthusiastic support of the mayors, council and residents of Mereni and Razeni villages, which offered the dilapidated buildings to UNHCR for renovation into apartments, this pilot refugee housing project would not have been possible,” said UNHCR Representative Peter Kessler. The refugees getting the new apartments were carefully selected based on their skills and willingness to contribute to their new host communities by a team including the Refugee Directorate of the Bureau for Migration and Asylum in the Ministry of Internal Affairs, UNHCR and its NGO implementing partners.
    [Show full text]
  • HOTĂRÎREA Nr. 13/00149 a Grupului De Lucru Cu Privire La Evaluarea Ofertelor Conform Licitaţiei Publice Nr
    HOTĂRÎREA nr. 13/00149 a grupului de lucru cu privire la evaluarea ofertelor conform licitaţiei publice nr. 13/00149 din 21.03.2013, în vederea achiziţionării lucrărilor de reparaţie curentă a drumurilor publice din pietriş amplasate teritorial în zona de centru a republicii incluzînd raioanele Anenii Noi, Călăraşi, Căuşeni, Criuleni, Hînceşti, Ialoveni, Nisporeni, Orhei, Rezina, Ştefan Vodă, Străşeni, Ungheni, conform necesităţilor Î.S.”Administraţia de Stat a Drumurilor” 03 aprilie 2013 mun.Chişinău Grupul de lucru numit prin ordinul Î.S.”Administraţia de Stat a Drumurilor” Nr. 14 din 27.03.2012, a efectuat evaluarea ofertelor în următoarea componenţă: Preşedintele grupului: - Iurie Pașa – manager-şef adjunct; Vicepreşedinte: - Valeriu Cotruță - șef, direcţia construcţii şi reparaţii capitale; Secretar: - Veaceslav Teleman – şef, serviciul licitaţii; Membrii grupului: - Fiodor Lozan - șef, direcția întreținerea drumurilor, Ministerul Transporturilor și Infrastructurii Drumurilor; - Veaceslav Potop – șef adjunct, Inspecția de Stat în Construcții; - Viorel Pană – şef adjunct, direcţia finanţele economiei naţionale, cheltuieli capitale şi achiziţii publice a Ministerului Finanţelor; - Alexandru Ghițu - șef, serviciul juridic; - Cristian Drăgălin – consultant, serviciul licitaţii; - Ruslan Anii – consultant, serviciul tehnico-operativ. Obiectul licitației: achiziţionarea lucrărilor de reparaţie curentă a drumurilor publice din pietriş amplasate teritorial în zona de centru a republicii incluzînd raioanele Anenii Noi, Călăraşi, Căuşeni, Criuleni, Hînceşti, Ialoveni, Nisporeni, Orhei, Rezina, Ştefan Vodă, Străşeni, Ungheni I. Principalele date legate de pregătirea licitaţiei 1. Sursa de finanţare: Programul privind repartizarea mijloacelor fondului rutier pe anul 2013 2. Finanţarea lucrării se derulează prin: Î.S.”Administraţia de Stat a Drumurilor” 3. Organizatorul licitaţiei: Î.S.”Administraţia de Stat a Drumurilor” 4. Forma de licitaţie aleasă: licitaţie deschisă (publică) cu contract de antrepriză 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Progress Report for 2009
    Contract number: 2009/219-955 Project Title: Building confidence between Chisinau and Tiraspol Report starting date: 01 January 2010 Report end date: 31 December 2011 Implementing agency: UNDP Moldova Country: Republic of Moldova Support to Confidence Building Measures II – Final Report 2010-2011 – submitted by UNDP Moldova 1 Table of Contents I. SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................................................. 3 II. CONTEXT ................................................................................................................................................................. 4 III. PROJECT BACKGROUND .................................................................................................................................. 5 1. BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT ............................................................................................................................................ 5 2. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ........................................................................................................................................ 6 3. CIVIL SOCIETY DEVELOPMENT ...................................................................................................................................... 7 4. SUPPORT TO CREATION OF DNIESTER EUROREGION AND RESTORATION OF RAILWAY TRAFFIC. ........................................... 7 IV. SUMMARY OF IMPLEMENTATION PROGRESS .........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Local Elections in the Republic of Moldova (20 October 2019)
    38th SESSION Report CG38(2020)12prov 14 February 2020 Local elections in the Republic of Moldova (20 October 2019) Committee on the Honouring of Obligations and Commitments by Member States of the European Charter of Local Self-Government (Monitoring Committee) Rapporteur:1 Vladimir PREBILIC, Slovenia (L, SOC/G/PD) Draft recommendation (for vote) ............................................................................................................. 3 Explanatory memorandum (for information) ........................................................................................... 5 Summary Following an invitation of the authorities of the Republic of Moldova, the Congress carried out a mission to observe the local elections in the country on 20 October 2019. Prior to the main mission, a reduced Congress Delegation visited Chisinau from 2 to 4 October to carry out a pre-electoral visit. The Delegation to observe the 20 October local elections was deployed from 17 to 21 October 2019 and involved 24 observers from 21 European countries. On the Election Day, the Delegation was divided into eleven teams, which visited some 200 polling stations across the country and observed the voting as well as the counting process. Technically, the elections were well prepared and administered by an overall experienced electoral staff at the level of the polling stations. The Congress welcomes some of the efforts made by the Moldovan authorities to improve the legal framework for elections, in particular amendments aiming at a better regulation of financing of political parties and regulation of campaign activities. However, the changes were introduced close to the Election Day and implemented in a very tight timeframe, increasing pressure on electoral bodies and generating uncertainty among candidates and citizens. Despite some positive changes, the Congress expresses its concern about the overly burdensome registration requirements for independent candidates compared to the candidates from political parties.
    [Show full text]
  • Nature-Based Tourism – an Opportunity to Increase Sustainable Development in Moldova
    Tatiana Mereniuc Master in Tourism Nature-based Tourism – An Opportunity to Increase Sustainable Development in Moldova 2015 Coordinator: Dr. Ana Maria Rodrigues Monteiro Sousa Acknowledgements I would like to express my gratitude to all persons that contributed directly and indirectly to the successful accomplishment of the present research. First of all, I would like to express my profound respect to my coordinator, Dr. Ana Maria Rodrigues Monteiro Sousa and to thank her for the major investment in my academic formation, but most of all for the unconditional help, support, guidance and motivation provided throughout the entire process of the development of my research. The received advices and the constructive criticism had a decisive impact on the final result of my project. In the same context, I would like to thank the entire academic staff from the Faculty of Arts of the University of Porto and to address special thanks to the Director of the Master in Tourism course, Dr. Luis Paulo Saldanha Martins. The support provided by the representatives of the International Office of the Faculty of Arts helped me a lot in overcoming different issues arisen during the whole period of my professional formation. I would also like to express my unlimited love and gratitude to my family from Moldova, my mom, my elder brother and my grandparents, who despite the distance between us have always supported me, believed in my abilities and encouraged me in every initiative. My warmest thanks are addressed to my husband, Andrei, who accompanied me during the whole process of thesis elaboration and provided constant help and care.
    [Show full text]
  • Serviciul Vamal
    Republica Moldova SERVICIUL VAMAL ORDIN Nr. OSV449/2016 din 05.12.2016 cu privire la modificarea anexei nr.8 la Ordinul Serviciului Vamal nr.346-O din 24.12.2009 „Referitor la aprobarea Normelor tehnice privind imprimarea, utilizarea şi completarea declaraţiei vamale în detaliu” Publicat : 23.12.2016 în MONITORUL OFICIAL Nr. 459-471 art. 2145 Data intrării în vigoare Întru asigurarea executării Hotărîrii Guvernului Republicii Moldova ”Cu privire la aprobarea efectivului-limită și a Regulamentului Serviciului Vamal” nr. 04 din 02.01.2007, alin. (4) art. 9, alin. (2) art. 132 şi alin. (4) art. 175 din Codul vamal al Republicii Moldova, nr. 1149-XIV din 20.07.2000, ORDON: 1. Se modifică anexa nr. 8 la Ordinul Serviciului Vamal „Referitor la aprobarea Normelor tehnice privind imprimarea, utilizarea şi completarea declaraţiei vamale în detaliu.” nr. 346-O din 24.12.2009, care va avea următorul cuprins: Cod birou / Denumire birou / post vamal Localitatea limitrofă post vamal 1000 Nord 1010 COSTEȘTI (PVFI, rutier) STÎNCA 1020 LIPCANI (PVFI, rutier) RĂDĂUȚI PRUT 1030 CRIVA1 (PVFI, rutier) MAMALIGA 1040 CRIVA2 (PVFI, feroviar) MAMALIGA 1050 LARGA1 (PVFI, rutier) KELMENȚI 1060 LARGA2 (PVFI, feroviar) KELMENȚI 1070 BRICENI (PVFI, rutier) ROSOȘANI 1080 GRIMĂNCĂUȚI (PVFS, rutier) VASKIVȚI 1090 OCNIȚA1 (PVFI, feroviar) SOKIREANÎ 1100 OCNIȚA2 (PVFI, rutier) SOKIREANÎ 1110 VOLCINEȚ (PVFI, feroviar) MOGHILIOV-PODOLISK 1120 OTACI (PVFI, rutier) MOGHILIOV-PODOLISK 1130 UNGURI (PVFL, rutier) BRONNIȚA 1140 COSĂUȚI (PVFI, fluvial) IAMPOL 1150 SOROCA(PVFS,
    [Show full text]
  • Wine Tourism: an Opportunity to Increase International Awareness Towards Moldova 2015
    Master in Tourism Wine Tourism: An Opportunity to Increase International Awareness towards Moldova 2015 A Master Thesis of Andrei Trofimov (201301713) Supervisor: Dr. João Paulo de Jesus Faustino Acknowledgments This thesis would not have been completed without the enduring encouragement and support of certain persons to whom I am very grateful. First of all I would like to thank my supervisor Dr. João Paulo de Jesus Faustino. His professional and academic expertise was of crucial importance for my project. His key support, guidance and advices were very helpful and helped me to improve myself and reach my goals. I gained not only academic knowledge by also a big moral support across the long way. I would also want to thank all the professors and academic staff from the Faculty of Arts from University if Porto and International Office, I gained profound knowledge and support in different subjects, which helped me a lot in my academic and professional growing. Moreover, I would like to thank all the interview people who have spent their precious time and contributed to this paper with remarkable information from wine industry and tourism from Moldova. Special thanks also for all the new friends and relations that I made here during my stay in fascinating city of Porto, it was a great experience to be a part of a multinational environment sharing culture, traditions and great time. Last but not least, I would like to express all my gratitude to my beloved family mom, dad and brother who kept me motivated and believed in me through all the process.
    [Show full text]
  • Moldova Country Fact-Sheet
    MOLDOVA COUNTRY FACT-SHEET CONTENTS OVERVIEW • GENERAL INFORMATION ON MOLDOVA • SOCIO-ECONOMIC SITUATION • PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION • SOCIAL WELFARE • PENSIONS • MEDICAL CARE • HOUSING • EMPLOYMENT • REINTEGRATION AND RECONSTRUCTION ASSISTANCE • EDUCATION • VULNERABLE PERSONS • IO’S/NGO’S • ACCESS TO FINANCIAL SERVICES IOM Moldova/ Chisinau International Organization for Migration IOM str. 36/1 Ciuflea, CHIŞINĂU MD 2001, REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA Misiunea în Republica Moldova str. Ciuflea 36/1, "Infocentru", , CHIŞINĂU MD 2001, REPUBLICA MOLDOVA Tel. +37322/ 23 29 40; 23 29 41; 23 47 01. Fax. +37322/ 23 28 62. E-mail: [email protected] TABLE OF CONTENTS Moldova, Regions, Municipalities ........................................................................................................................... 3 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................................................................ 4 1. GENERAL INFORMATION ON MOLDOVA. PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION........................................................ 4 1.1 Geography................................................................................................................................................ 4 1.2 History ...................................................................................................................................................... 4 1.3 Population and Language ........................................................................................................................ 5 1.4
    [Show full text]
  • Moldova Bulletin
    Moldova Bulletin A Digest of Freedom of Expression-Related Developments in Moldova December 2004 – February 20051 *** In this Issue: • In the December 2004 case Busuioc v Moldova, the European Court of Human Rights holds that Moldova violated Article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights. • The public broadcaster TeleRadio Moldova remains largely dependent on the authorities. Elections • The strict regulations on media and elections appear to have undercut free debate. • The media fails to provide comprehensive information to the public on the election campaign. The ruling Communist Party is portrayed in an unduly positive context. • The OSCE states that the elections generally complied with OSCE standards, but “campaign conditions and media access were not satisfactorily equitable”. • The Central Elections Commission is accused of lack of transparency. • Opposition candidates and campaigners are harassed during the electoral campaign. Parliamentary Elections On 6 March 2005, Moldova held elections for a new, unicameral Parliament consisting of 2 101 Members of Parliament with a four-year mandate. According to official results, 45.98 1 This Bulletin covers events up to the parliamentary elections of 6 March 2005. 1 percent of Moldovans gave their vote to the ruling Communist Party, while the Democratic Moldova electoral bloc received 28.53 percent of votes and the Christian Popular Democratic Party 9.07 percent of votes.3 No other competitors passed the electoral threshold. Based on these results, the Communist Party received
    [Show full text]