Th e Evolution of Social and Spatial Inequalities During Transition and Stabilization Periods in the Post-Socialist “Winner” City of Cluj, Romania

Th is paper deals with spatial processes linked to social inequalities in the city of Cluj, Romania during the past twenty-fi ve years from the collapse of communism. Th e article is based on diff erent methods (statistical data analysis for segregation indexes, qualitative data for interpretation) and argues that the forced urbanization process specifi c to the socialist period “made the foundation” for the spatial and social segregation developed during transition and economic restructuration aft er the post-Fordist turn reached the Transylvanian major city, Cluj. Th e author presents the spatial patterns of segregation through social variables like education, ethnicity, type of residence and district in tables and illustrative visual maps.


Introduction
In their attempt to grasp the most salient diff erences between cities, photos and fi lms usually juxtapose luxury houses with small, deteriorated ones located in poor districts on the fringes of localities.Such vivid visualizations of social inequalities, despite of their attempt to be realistic, lack an important aspect: to depict distances among social categories like the wealthy and the jobless poor.Th ese visual representations overlook the most important principle that shape modern cities: the spatial delimitation of certain social categories, or-in other words-the fact that "social and cultural distances" are objectivised into "spatial and physical distances", certain social categories being spatially discerned too.
To open up, social realities go against these visual representations, therefore radically different types of residences will almost never be found in one another's proximity; on the contrary, same social categories are usually living in a signifi cant proximity from each other.
Th is paper deals with spatial processes linked to social inequalities in the city of Cluj during the past twenty-fi ve years from the collapse of communist regime.Although the huge literature on social inequalities in Romania (see Zamfir E. 1995;Zamfir C. 2001;Molnar 1999Molnar , 2009;;Péter 2006Péter , 2007) ) carefully accounts quantitative and qualitative aspects of the issue, territorial representation of social disparities are approached only by a few of them (see Stnculescu -Berevoiescu 2004;Mionel 2010;Pásztor 2003Pásztor , 2006Pásztor , 2007)).Meanwhile the West-European and American urban sociology literature gives a special focus to the issues of segregation of the poverty and wealth, to that of ghettoes, slums and gated communities, in Romania only a small number of analyses focus on spatial inequalities and segregation.
Th e former socialist states engendered some special forms for social and spatial segregation.It was so, as their egalitarian politics-together with a series of social and economical decisions-shaped the very structures responsible for distributing houses for the personal use of the population.A main target for socialist modernization and urbanization was to vanish "old societies" and destroy the inner framework of traditional communities.Modifying the structure of houses by building large districts of blocks of fl ats which provided standardized living spaces for all social categories was one possible mean to reach that political goal (Mihilescu -Nicolau -Greorghiu -Olaru 1994).
In communist times the housing stock was in state ownership, meanwhile the rights to distribute living-and workplaces were in charge of the central administration.Th us, either the chance of changing a workplace or that of accessing a new residence were equally reduced, or residential segregation was kept in an inferior level compared to the western states (Ladányi 1989).During transition to market economy the majority of the housing stock was passed over the property of dwellers, and thus the demand, supply and prices of homes became regulated by free market laws.If so, there is to investigate, how do economic and social changes modify the urban structures, making them to follow Western European trends?
Th is study seeks answers for the following questions: How the post-1989 models of spatial inequality and urban segregation can be described?How the features of the housing stock inherited by the communist system infl uence the new models of spatial organizations?Quantitative data for this analysis were taken out from various sources, some providing measurements for the analysis itself, others contribute in contextualizing the phenomena.Sources were the followings: Detailed data on sections of the 1992, 2002 and 2011 offi cial censuses.Further, statistical database containing values of the estates in 2012 and fi nally data sets from the Department for Estate Records of the Cluj City Hall.
Methods for data analysis were the followings: First, analysis of the detailed census data, by using indicators for segregation developed by Duncan and Duncan (1973) as a central category. 1Th ese quantitative tools were built up following Shevsky and Bell's model based on one hand on economical condition of the population (occupation, education, features of the living space) and on the other hand on demographic aspects of the family.I used methods to trace and describe the ethnic structure of the space in Cluj (see SHEVSKY -BELL in. Cséfalvay 1994. 252.).Second, I build up a database of the local real estate market based on statistics from commercials on properties available for sale.In doing so I tried to grasp diff erences in prices between estates settled in diff erent areas of the city.Finally, I used some qualitative methods, such as semi-structured interviews and participant observation, which served as tools to reveal the emic aspects of these social phenomena.By using them I intended to understand how social processes function in urban context (e.g.Pásztor 2003)?

Major Social and Urbanization Processes in Cluj, Transylvania
Cluj is the third largest city in Romania, following Bucharest and Iaşi, as concerns its number of inhabitants; the city has an important economical, social and cultural role as a centre of the whole Transylvanian region.According to the 2011 census, the city population was 319,582 persons (418,153 persons in larger metropolitan area).Urban development of the area is defi ned in line with two (plus one) periods of time: the fi rst is the historical past, reaching out until the end of WW II.followed by the socialist period; the third in this line were years of transition and post-socialist stability.However the pre-socialist period encompasses important periods of economic and social development, this paper deals only with the second and third one: the socialist and post-socialist times.Th e socialist system  developed its specifi c urban structure, diff erent from the West-European model (Szelényi 1996).During these years the number of population had signifi cantly increased, triplicating its value during the XX th Century.In line with these authors, calculation of such indicators comes from the sum of the absolute value of the diff erences in procentual division of given social categories on a given area.0 and 1.where 1 denotes that position of these two categories mutually exclude each other (if one meets a certain category in a certain area.it is sure that the very same category does not occur elswhere.too; this is called total segregation in accordance with the literature); 0 denotes the case where dispersion of these two categories is equal.both being present in a given percentage in the investigated area.Formula: S=1/2*∑ |Ai/A-Bi/B|.where B=Total -A.S -indicator of segregation.Ai -number of population A on the area i. Bi -number of population B (Total -A) on i.A -total number of the A population.B -total number of B population (Total -A).Some scholars defi ne this indicator ast he number of those.who ought to move in certain areas.to obtain an equality in dispersion (Csanádi-Ladányi 1992.94.). 2 The increase percentage is related to the population in 1930 as the interval between the censuses differs.

Studies
Th is extreme ascension of the population in Cluj between 1930-1992 was caused by a forced modernization (industrialization and urbanization) and the rural-urban migration, specifi c for state socialism.Strong industrialization caused a major change in the occupational structure of the city: for example in 1956 the percent of industrial population was 48.1 percent, encompassing the ones employed in commerce as well as the auxiliary personnel of small-trade business owners.In that year 37.5 percent of the population were clerks and intellectuals, 7.6 percent were agricultural workers and 5.31 percent small-trade businessmen.In 1970 out of the 108,904 of employees of the city a number of 77,531 (71.2 percent) were workers (Csetri 2001).Th is development in industry employment remained a dominant trend in the 80's, followed by a shift in the occupational structure (see Pásztor 2003).
Lack of a Master Plan as a reference for urban planning was a specifi c feature of the Romanian socialist urbanization.It was so, as decisions about territorial placement of the industrial objectives were short-time ones taken at the highest political level (Benedek 2004).Th ese local socialist types of interventions reshaped the towns and cities; meanwhile politics of systematization 3 (Deletant 1993) channelled into new directions the previously existing "classic" processes of modernization and urbanization.Th is is why demarcation lines of these settlements are diff erent from the ones in Western countries.
Th e historical city centre of Cluj, despite of modernization in local road system, preserved its traditional aspects, and remained mainly untouched by the "grand socialist systematizations".Simultaneously other "new socialist urban places and centres" were constructed to become real symbols of the system: two "new centres" in Cluj were made up in the 1960's to alter the historical ones: Lucian Blaga Square 4 and Mihai Viteazul Square, 5 which lie outside of the old city walls, in it's proximity.Other areas, like the industrial (Iris, Bulgaria) and the residential ones (Mănăștur, Mărăști, Grigorescu, Zorilor) were attached to these central places of the city.Great industrial investments of the communist times took place in the north-eastern parts of the city, in the immediate proximity of the railways area. 6 An utmost aim for socialist forced modernization and urbanization was to alter or even 3 Notorious, known as "systematization", a Romanian socialist way to conceive urban development gave a special stress to (alternative) centers, considered being spatial representations of the new proletarian political power."Old" and "New Centers" became places of political power, administration, education, public health services and the most important cultural activities.In many cases the urbanization conceived in the spirit of socialist notion of space meant the demolition -at least partially -of the old bourgeoisie town and its reconstruction in line with new ideology.Bucharest and Miercurea-Ciuc (administrative capital of Harghita County in Szeklerland, situated in eastern part of Transylvania) are telling and eloquent examples of these brutal policies, where new socialist centers were built to alter the old ones-these being let gone by the board. 4Th e old square, bearing the name of Saint George, was a central area until the mid XIXth century due to the presence of the University Library.Under the impact of communist policies it was enlarged in a triangular shape, becoming an area, where some new, typically communist buildings were constructed in the 1960's: the Student's House of Culture and a block of fl at on its opposite side.Th e Saint George statue was removed into Kogălniceanu Street, the square being renamed as Peace Square, re-baptized later in 1990 in Lucian Blaga. 5Th e Mihai Viteazul Square is located on the old Széchenyi Square.In this place a new block of fl ats was constructed, dividing the place into two.On the ground level this block hosts one of the biggest and wellknown cinemas of the city, Republica.In front of the cinema erecting the statue of Mihai Viteazul created a new, representative location for national communism.On the opposite side of the block an indoor market was made, which captured the old, traditional place of the old, local community of Hostát. 6Technofrig and the Matchmaking Factory were built closest to the railway station, and in the eastward direction one fi nds Dermata shoe factory (rebaptized as Clujana), Unirea and Carbochim, all in Bulgaria districts; Iris and Libertatea were built in Iris.CUG and Sanex were in Someşeni district.
vanish "old societies" and destroy traditional communities and collective memories.Modifying the internal structure of residential spaces by building districts of blocks of fl ats in order to erase the old areas was one effi cient mean to reach that goal (Mihilescu -Nicolau -Greorghiu -Olaru 1994).Owners of the demolished old houses were allocated apartments in the newly built districts, thus in 1990, in accordance with data provided by the Offi ce for Registering Estates of the local government of the city of Cluj, only 19 percent of the population lived in (detached and semi-detached) houses-the remaining 81 percent dwelled in blocks of fl ats.According to the directives of the well-known Systematization Plan, previously signifi cant residential areas should been partially demolished, and "bad-famed" ones (so called colonies) populated by the poor and/or Roma, were erased.In Cluj the biggest achievement of urban systematization were the fi ve districts with blocks of fl ats, 7 had being built from the 1960's onwards, with uniformed, ready-made, low-quality buildings, which have been serving as living places for the majority of present-day Cluj dwellers.Th ese districts are highly populated, with a short distance between the buildings.Number of the inhabitants is over 200-300 on 100 m 2 of the total surface.A medium surface for these apartments was of 34.9 square meter; the living area was 12 m 2 per one resident (Pásztor 2003).
Features and intensity of the post-1990 urban development were infl uenced by the following major processes: a) the democratization of the political system, which engendered a stronger infl uence of local, political and administrative bodies on decision-making, and which also made room for local initiatives; b) the changes in the economic structures, transition to market economy through privatization, the increase of private property followed by a strong globalization of the local economy; c) changes in the economic structures which enhanced a decrease in industrial sector in favour of the third one; d) Industrial restructuring (deindustrialization) and e) EU-integration (Benedek 2004).
Occupational structure between 1992 and 2011 had radically changed as well: meanwhile in 1992 census data show that 46.39 percent out of the urban population worked in manufacturing and processing industry, this percentage had been almost gone half by year 2002 and decreased to a fi ft h by 2010.In opposition, the number of employees in the third sector had signifi cantly raised: in 1992 it was 47.4 percent, 67.9 percent in 2002 and 77.8 percent in 2010.Major increases occurred in the realm of commerce, public alimentation, and hotel services from 9 to 21 percent, fi nancing, banks and insurances from below 1 percent to almost 6 percent from the total number of the active population; such change too appeared in the realm of education.
Due to the neo-liberal politics applied by the local government aft er 2004, foreign investments were increased, one may even say, the city became a dragger of them. 8Development in communication and transport enhanced a real post-Fordist transition (Pásztor -Péter 2009) with high impact.Together with all districts with houses and socialist blocks some new ones appeared for the elites and upper middle class (Gheorgheni, Europa, Bună Ziua), as well as districts for the new lower middle class (especially Baciu and Floreşti).

Studies
BELVEDERE M E R I DI ON A L E ..

Spatial Inequalities and Residential Segregation
To measure social status, a series of statistical variables were used in this research: occupation, level of education, occupational status, demographic features, ethnic structures as well as conditions of the housing stock.In order to grasp the core of the residential segregation in Cluj, the variables with strong impact on spatial inequalities are subjected to a detailed analysis and presentation through this section; these ones are: ethnicity, level of education and data on the real estate.
In line with 2011 census data, 75.7 percent of the Cluj population was Romanians, 15.3 percent Hungarians, and only a tiny 1.0 percent was Roma (0.9 percent of other ethnic origins).Th ese percentages are not divided equally in space; proportions of certain ethnic groups in the diff erent districts are higher or lower than the medium.Percentage of the Hungarians, for instance is higher in districts like the downtown area (Bulgaria, Gheorgheni, house-are in Grigorescu, Abator) and their number is lower in the neighbourhoods built in communist period (like Mănăştur, Mărăşti, Plopilor or even Între Lacuri).Proportion of the Roma is higher in peripheral areas of Someşeni, Bulgaria and Iris.Th e following table presents the segregation indexes in case of diff erent ethnic groups in 1992, 2002 and 2011: As it comes out from this table above, indicator for segregation varies for diff erent ethnic groups.Meanwhile it shows a low and relatively constant value for Romanians and Hungarians, while it is high for the Roma, and has been considerably increased during 1992-2011.In this case, the segregation index of 0.83 denotes that over 80 percent of the local Roma ought to move into other urban areas for their segregation to become zero!Analysis aft er the level of education reveals that over one third (35.33%) of the population graduated high school and 14.3 percent vocational school.Almost one fi ft h (17.67%) has only primary school or no graduated school.In this case, the segregation indexes are usually similar with the ones for ethnicity, bringing into light that the city is almost equally diversifi ed alongside to this variable.As this table below shows, level of segregation measured through the dimension of educational attainment had lowered during the 1990's and began to increase again fast in the following century.In the beginning of the 2000's the most segregated were those with university degrees and vocational schools, as well as the population without any graduated school.Th us, those with superior studies are over-represented among downtown (city centre) dwellers, as well as in historical districts located alongside the north-west-south-west axis: Andrei Mureşanu, Grigorescu, Dorobanţilor and Pata Streets area.Th eir number is much lower in marginal districts as Someşeni, Baciu or Iris, which are areas populated mainly by dwellers with low education.
Analysis of the spatial aspects of social inequalities approached through the perspective of the housing inequalities is a controversial account, still quite frequently used by the fi rst scholars of urban ecology as well as by today's economists and sociologists.Greer (1966) speaks about a link between living condition and social structure, coining the thesis of vicious circle of housing.In his view the structural position of housing takes in certain possibilities and social advantages; and this states for the other way round: lack of such advantages are hardly to get through.Th e vicious circle appears in the context of repayment: those who perform socially useful or desirable activities have better chances for accessing better living conditions, which-at a certain point-become material and symbolical resources themselves.Following this logic an inferior position in the structure of living conditions may become a structural obstacle for performing activities recognized by the society, and the default of such practices is sanctioned and refl ected in the quality of living.Th us, the housing inequalities are reproduced and reinforced (Greer 1966) turning gradually individuals, who face the same housing conditions into housing classes (see Szelényi 1990).Th is concept enables a macro-social analysis of this issue, as it grasps the system of structural positions of housing.Rex (1968) coins his basic idea in the same line; in his view there is a shortage in (high quality) housing stock in urban areas, thus members of diff erent social groups have unequal chances to access it (Rex 1968).Completing this theory, Musil (1982) states that social stratifi cation could be approached only through social and cultural elements, which could be the most visible entities in the housing structure of a certain urban environments.
Such diff erences are important for two reasons: fi rstly because diff erences in average prices of estates settled in diff erent areas indicate that acquisition of a certain property could be much diffi cult in an area than in an other.Secondly, it also reveals that amplitude and ratio of the accumulated capital will vary in function of the prices and infl ation.Th us, in a considerable proportion, the location of one estate infl uences the amount of profi t or loss deriving from its exploitation (Hamnett 1992).Th irdly, these diff erences are socially conditioned, or depending on the occupation, income or gender (Hamnett 1992).
In my opinion, the analysis of property prices could be and adequate method to grasp spatial segregation, as these values are-at one hand-indicators for estate quality and also an index of those social factors that infl uence the evolution of prices.Th e social perception of the area, for instance, may have a strong and special role in this evolution.Th erefore I made up a database of commercials/announcements about selling and buying real estates; it contains ads that occur in the most important real estate agencies from Cluj 9 in the print and on-line version of the Piaţa weekly newspaper. 10Th is database contains 1002 individual cases, indicating the type, area, dimensions, price of the estate, and pieces of information about its quality (metering systems, fi nishes, stand for parking).Despite of many advantages, such database has its limits too.It does not contain clues about the real prices one property was sold or bought at.(Still, even if the recorded prices are higher than the real ones.diff erences between them are systematic, thus our statistics are not biased).To go further, these methods are unable to provide a very concise image on social stratifi cation, because our announcements do not reveal extreme poverty.Th e formal real estate market excludes devastated and extreme areas like Pata Rât or Byron Street, with a predominantly Roma population.It is so as these are districts with social houses, where residents may live with no legalized property rights or registered addresses.As a starting point, a regression analysis was applied to identify factors and their weight that shape estate prices.Th en, by using the method of comparing means I analysed the average estate prices for each district.Th is was applied to fi nd out how location and features of a certain estate infl uences its prices, in other words, to what extent could be social diff erences considered spatial ones?Dependent variable for this regression analysis 11 was the estate price, independent variables were estate type (old district -dummy, communist district -dummy, new district -dummy, reference variable district, Centre), estate type (block of fl ats -dummy), estate surface in square meters, existence of fi nishes (dummy), metric systems (dummy), parking stand (dummy), energy effi ciency (dummy).Results are summarized in the following table . 12As the table reveals, the variables defi ning estate prices are: surface (in sq.meters), district type (old one, built before the 1960's, 13 communist one, 14 new one 15 ), estate type (block of fl ats, detached or semi-detached houses) and energy effi ciency.Th e highest Beta value has the useful surface, this being the variable considerably infl uencing estate price; surface is followed by district type.All variables referring to the three districts take a negative Beta value, meaning that all of these have negative infl uence on the price compared with the reference variable, Centre.It is also noteworthy that for New District we have the highest Beta value (β=-0.207).Variables that also infl uence the price, true their impact is less important are the block of fl ats (β=-0.064)and energy effi ciency (β=0.045).
To sum up, the estate size has the strongest infl uence over the price, however location is impor-11 To fi nd the most suitable regression model, I used Stepwise, which includes only variables that have a p value lower than 0.05. 12Th e coeffi cient of determination (r2) is 0.833; one may consider this model with a high explaining value: the property price being in 83.3% explained by variables included in the model. 13Railway Station area.Andrei Mureșanu.Bulgaria.Gruia.Gheorgheni case 14 Mănăștur.Mărăști.Grigorescu.Gheorgheni.Zorilor.Iris.Plopilor 15 Baciu.Bună Ziua.Florești.Borhanci tant too for this equation.In order to grasp the meaning of such diff erentiation, we compared the average estate price for each district.Th e analysis was carried on separately for blocks of fl ats, detached houses with gardens and semi-detached ones.Average prices for the former (total and standard prices for sq.m) are the following for the districts: In Cluj the average price for an apartment in block of fl ats is 906 Euro/m 2 , as well as 48,832 Euro, the medium size of an average apartment for sale is 55 m 2 .Th e lowest prices per m 2 are in the new districts with blocks built in the 2000's like Baciu (812,29 Euro/ m 2 ) and Floreşti (540,42 Euro/ m 2 ) and in the communist districts settled in the industrial areas of the city, like Iris (796,39 Euro/ m 2 ) and Dâmbul Rotund (768,36 Euro/ m 2 ); Someşeni is an exception for this case, 17 this being an area with detached houses and-except one building built in the 1990's-only a very few blocks built in the 1970's that served as dormitories for industrial workers and the army.As the following table shows, price per m 2 of an apartment settled in the downtown area is almost double compared to one in Floreşti.
Cheaper apartments can be found in these districts too.It is so, as houses with the smallest surface in the city were built in these areas.Except Someşeni, the cheapest houses in Cluj are in Iris (average surface 30.13 m 2 .average price 23,219 Euro), Dâmbul Rotund (average surface 49.14 m 2 .average price 35 471 Euro), new districts in Floreşti 18 (average surface 70.27 m 2 .average price 37,114 Euro), Baciu 19 (average surface 53.35 m 2 .average price 42,188 Euro).Average prices for detached or semi-detached houses (total price and standard price for m 2 ) are the following in each district: 17 It is a former village attached to the city in 1968 (Gaal 2001).which preserved its rurual features until today.
A signifi cant part of the residents live in detached houses.many do gardening as second activity or live out of agricultural work even nowdays.Th e airport was built in the area.and so was the European road E576.and the place is traversed by the railways.too.All these make the district an important industrial and commercial region. 18Th is is a neighboring bigger village located in the western part of the city.Due to the local property investments the place became one of the most important suburbs of Cluj.Until the late 1990's the village preserved its rural character.having residents.who lived in detached houses with gardens.Th e aggregate of new buildings.mainly blocks of fl ats.were erected on the former agricultural lands.According to the 2011 census.the local population is 21,832 persons.Meanwhile in 2002 their number was only 7,470 19 Although Baciu is not a district but a bigger village settled near Cluj, it was included in this analysis.It was so.as the area become an important Cluj suburbia due the property investments during the 2000's.Th e place mainly preserved its rural character: locals are living in detached houses with gardens; the new properties were built between the village and the city of Cluj.

Tanulmányok
BELVEDERE M E R I DI ON A L E ..Houses show a somehow similar stratifi cation, slightly changed due to the diff erences between districts.Average price per m 2 for the houses for sale in Cluj is of 993.7 Euro with an average price of 139,953 Euro.Th ese estates have an average surface of 138 m 2 with an adjacent medium size of the building plot of 395sqm

Conclusions
I may conclude that Cluj is a relatively segregated city, having the highest segregation index for the Roma population, a group growing in size; for population with high level; and for population with low level of education.In the same time analysis of the property market shows too, a signifi cant degree of spatial inequality, where the district type and physical/geographical location of the estate are of high importance.
Although the analysis shows a change in the measures of the indices of segregation in post-socialist period, the character of the present territorial inequality is defi ned by the social structure defi ned by past socialist period.Before 1989 the administration of houses as well as that of workplaces was centralized, the housing stock being state owned, which kept segregation on a level lower than in western countries (Ladányi 1989).But during the 90's the majority of the houses suddenly became property of the residents and the real estate market fast started to follow the market rules.Still, estates built in socialist times make up a signifi cant part of the housing stock.In Cluj, during the socialist forced urbanization the extremes were cleared away (poor districts as well as some houses of the previous elite groups', their residents being forced to move in newly built blocks).But these policies became unsuccessful in healing embedded social problems: poverty, previously dispersed in diff erent areas was practically blurred; however due to the socialist housing policies a highest number of the population aft er the change of regime became subjected to impoverishment.Subsequently, the "traditional" poor areas disappeared from Cluj, being turned into block of fl ats districts that lie in a higher surface of land.
Urbanization and the housing policies (housing allocations for dwellers) during socialism heavily infl uenced the later segregation and the tendencies of social diversifi cation in the following ways (Pásztor 2003): 1. Th e offi cial homogenization policies were not entirely refl ected in housing policies: in most of the cases, blocks of diff erent qualities and levels of conveniences were built in various areas.Such architecture followed in fact economic and technical reasoning, as simultaneous constructions of the same type of blocks could have been fi nished much cheaply and in a shorter time.Th us, areas where the blocks with low level of qualities were concentrated gradually became socially disadvantaged zones.In other words, the later spatial and social segregation was already "coded" in socialist urbanization patterns.
2. Before 1989 diff erent industrial units and institutions were in charge with the allocation of houses.Th us, despite of the politics for social homogenization, the system initiated conditions for segregation too.It was so, as in most cases employees of the same institution were living (were allocated apartments) in the same area. 20As apartments in diff erent areas had diff erent quality, a series of districts became status symbols for their residents; meanwhile others were labelled as "no-go areas".Aft er 1989 a series of industrial units, which previously were in charge with allocating apartments, were restructured or even closed, their employees became out of job, and this engendered and fastened the impoverishment of certain areas.
3. Allocations of the apartments were up to the family size: 21 the young, unmarried persons were usually living in worker's dormitories, young couples were allocated one-roomed apartments, depending of the family size.Th is system was perceived as one in move, thus the benefi ciaries were exchanging their allocated apartments between each other during the years of 20 Let's see one signifi cant example among many, related to the subject of this analysis.Blocks of fl ats from Splaiul Independenţei or Pavlov street were allocated in the 1960's to university teachers (Interview with the historian Ákos Egyed). 21Families or married couples were allocated apartaments according to family size.number of family-members and number of children.According to this process.the number of rooms in an allocated apartament should have been equal or one higher than the number of family members.For instance, to a family with four members was given a three-or four roomed apartament, however this principle was observed in accordance with the housing stock each industrial unit administrated.
socialism, according to individual or family needs.Situation of those young ones, who met the 1989 changes as dwellers of workers' dormitories became extremely hard, because in lack of an owned apartment they were much exposed to the risks of impoverishment (Zamfir 2001. 49.).Common infrastructure and overhead expenses are an other important factor, these providing costs that families are unable to control, which may seriously infl uence families with low income.Th ose, who become unable to pay these costs, are forced to sell their apartments and move into a cheaper one, or refuse to pay the overhead expenses, together with others.Th is phenomenon may infl uence two issues: the urban areas these houses are in, as well as the association of the house owners. ❋

Figure
Figure Nr.

Table  v
Evolution of the City Population in ClujBetween 1930 and 2012 2 Tetarom 2 (totally occupied by Emerson) and Tetarom 3 (initially occupied by Nokia and Transcarpatica, but aft er the withdrawal of the former the majority of the place is now used by Italian DeLonghi); plans for developing a Tetarom 4 were already carried out.A great majority of the investments in Cluj are malls and supermarkets.Th e biggest of this kind is Polus Center (140,000 m2., 140 millions of Euro).followed by Iulius Mall (85,000 m2., 45 millions of Euro).Important investments were made in the realm of communication (UPC cable network bought the locally founded Astra), as well as in the industrial sector (Ranbaxy bought medicine factory Terapia for 325 million USD.Source: http://www.capital.ro/index.php).

Table 2 v
Segregation Indexes Based on the Variable of Ethnicity

Table  v
Segregation indexes measured through the variable of education

Table  v
Regression Analysis on Variables that Infl uence the Estate Price in Cluj

Table  v
Average Prices and Average Surfaces of the Apartments in Cluj 16