84327 v2 The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this report do not necessarily reflect the views and position of the Executive Directors of the World Bank, the European Union, or the Government of Romania. TABLE OF CONTENTs Table of Contents List of Abbreviations ........................................................................................ 7 Romania’s growth poles policy has shaped an important part of the country’s development in recent years ......................................................... 9 The current growth poles policy includes several positive features ....... 11 3 Policies adapted to the expected evolution of growth poles ................. 25 On the other hand, the current growth poles policy has a few shortcomings .................................................................................................... 13 4 Planning for growth poles beyond defined metropolitan boundaries based on each area’s economic growth potential .................................. 27 A new urban systems approach in Romania is currently prepared by DG Regional Development within the Ministry of Regional 5 Truly integrated programs ........................................................................ 27 Development and Public Administration (MRDPA) ...................................... 15 There are several recommendations worth considering for the future 6K eep the same number of growth poles (if regions stay the same), but consider having a different number of urban development poles .......... 29 growth poles policy (2014-2020) .................................................................... 17 Equally important, rather than targeting public investments and 7 Consider the polarizing effect of București within the South Region ..... 29 programs at cities, the ROP should place at its core the people living in those areas ........................................................................................................ 19 8 Design proper monitoring and evaluation mechanisms ......................... 31 In practice, the implications of this new paradigm for the future growth poles policy include the following recommendations: 21 9 Designing robust governance structures for growth poles ..................... 33 1 Better definitions of intervention areas around growth poles based on functional criteria ...................................................................................... 21 10 Consider alternative governance structures to IDAs .............................. 35 2M ore targeted interventions based on specific contextual factors for each growth pole ...................................................................................... 23 11 Ensure better policy correlations ............................................................. 37 List of Abbreviations List of Abbreviations EC European Commission ERDF European Regional Development Fund EU European Union ICT Information and Communication Technology IDA International Development Association IDP Integrated Development Plan IEC Increasing Economic Competitiveness MA Managing Authority RDA Regional Development Agency ROP Regional Operational Program SOP Sectoral Operational Program 3 7 Growth Poles and Urban Development Poles Urban Development Poles Growth Poles Satu-Mare Suceava Romania’s growth poles policy has shaped an Iaşi Oradea Cluj-Napoca Bacău important part of the country’s development in Arad recent years. Deva Braşov Sibiu Timişoara Galaţi Brăila Ploieşti Râmnicu Vâlcea Piteşti Prepared in March 2008, it defined several categories of urban centers: 7 growth poles, one for each development region beyond București and 13 Constanţa urban development centers of regional importance. Craiova The 2007-2013 Regional Operational Programme allocated dedicated funding for these various tiers of urban agglomerations with the specified Performance of the growth poles under the ROP 2007-2013 (by July 2013) purpose of “increasing the quality of life and to create jobs in cities by rehabilitating the urban infrastructure, improving Allocated Funds Share of Share of (ERDF and State allocated allocated Projects submitted Contracted projects Growth Budget) funds funds Pole Value Value services, including social services, as well as by developing business support Mil. EURO Nr. (Mil. EURO) % Nr. (Mil. EURO) % structures and entrepreneurship.” Iaşi 111.25 16 171.98 154.59 10 108.68 97.69 Constanţa 90.32 36 92.64 102.57 27 58.04 64.26 Ploieşti 97.00 16 121.58 125.34 14 93.19 96.07 Craiova 95.5 17 122.75 128.54 15 94.9 99.37 Timişoara 70.49 28 92.14 130.73 23 76.94 109.15 Cluj-Napoca 82.41 23 97.51 118.32 17 86.88 105.42 Braşov 74.3 26 95.44 128.45 23 76.16 102.50 TOTAL 621.27 162 794.04 127.81 129 594.79 95.74 Source: The Ministry of Regional Development and Public Administration 9 In most countries economic growth is driven by a small number of large cities Share of growth in total GDP (%), 2000-2007 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Unitary South & West 37.9% 25.6% 9.7% 26.8% Cyprus 100.0% Luxembourg 100.0% Malta 94.5% 5.5% Greece 64.9% 7.3% 27.8% Ireland 51.1% 21.3% 27.6% UK 38.7% 24.0% 15.2% 22.1% Portugal 33.5% 2.2% 64.3% France 27.2% 34.4% 5.3% 33.0% Netherlands 26.6% 31.1% 14.8% 27.4% Unitary Former Socialist 36.6% 25.2% 4.5% 33.8% Latvia 68.1% 8.7% 23.2% Bulgaria 64.7% 14.8% 20.5% Estonia 63.9% 17.8% 18.3% Hungary 62.8% 14.5% 22.7% Lithuania 47.6% 29.7% 22.7% Czech Republic 42.7% 32.7% 24.7% Croatia 42.0% 11.3% 46.7% Slovenia 41.6% 13.7% 44.6% Romania 24.9% 20.2% 4.4% 50.5% Poland 21.9% 35.9% 11.2% 31.1% Unitary Northern 30.6% 26.0% 43.4% Finland 39.5% 20.3% 40.2% Denmark 38.5% 34.2% 27.3% Sweden 28.1% 29.7% 42.2% Norway 21.5% 20.5% 58.0% Unitary Regionalised 15.9% 31.8% 20.7% 31.6% Spain 22.9% Italy 12.1% 26.3% 15.1% 46.5% FEDERAL 11.5% 40.1% 13.5% 34.9% Belgium 43.3% 23.3% 33.5% Austria 30.2% 23.3% 46.5% Germany 2.2% 46.2% 18.4% 33.2% ALL COUNTRIES 28.7% 29.1% 10.8% 31.4% Capitals Second Tier Other Metro-regions Rest of country Sources: ESPON and Eurostat the fundamental First, it is based on a several positive features. for a country’s economic growth. from center cities to surrounding areas. and preparing integrated development plans – both measures are The current growth poles policy includes diverse firms, etc.) and integrated development projects for enhanced impact. for encouraging the formation of urban areas benefits of agglomeration and spillover effects balanced long-term development, in line with economic principles regarding centers within each respective region beyond București. It is also based on the critical Second, policymakers selected one growth pole for each region to encourage clear and simple identification recognition that cities are critical engines of seven growth poles as the largest economic and population with larger mass (bigger labor force; better supply chains; more Third, ROP funding has been contingent on cities forming metropolitan areas 11 How to define a city (Graz) and a commuting zone (Genova) On the other hand, the current growth poles High density cell (>1500 inh. per sq.km.) Urban Centre (Cluster of HD cells with Commune > 50% of its population in an Urban Audit City policy has a few shortcomings. Municipalities population > 50.000) urban centre City Commuting area Commuting area after including For example, it lacks a clear, in-depth understanding of how the designated enclaves and dropping exclaves growth poles can contribute to the general development of Romania and it is inherently based on regional boundaries, even though some urban centers entail cross-regional synergies. Additionally, the area of analysis and intervention is usually limited to a 30-kilometer buffer around growth pole centers, missing the fact that functional economic areas are usually larger and rely on the fact that people are generally willing to commute for up to about one-hour each way on a daily basis. Larger metropolitan areas basically allow for stronger economies, larger labor pools, and better incentives for investments. Last and not least, the formation of City Commune with > 15% of its employed population commuting to the city Larger Urban Zone metropolitan areas is based entirely on voluntary agreement among localities. associations that fail Commune Added enclave Removed exclave In practice, this has led to the formation of to formally include all localities that fall within corresponding functional areas. 13 Romania and EU targets towards the Europe 2020 Strategy Employment R&D CO2 Renewable Energy Early school Tertiary Reduction of rate (in %) in % of emission energy efficiency leaving in % education population GDP reduction – reduction in % at risk of targets of energy poverty (compared consumption or social exclusion in A new urban systems approach in Romania to 1990 in Mtoe levels) number of persons is currently prepared by DG Regional Targets 70% 2% 19% 24% 10 Mtoe 11.3% 26.7% 580,000 - RO Current 63.8% 0.48% 51.84% 20.79 16.6 Mtoe 17.4 21.8 240,000 Development within the Ministry of Regional situation (2012) (2011) (2011 (2012) (2012) (2012) (2012) (2011 - RO compared compared to to 1990 2008 levels) Development and Public Administration levels) Targets 75% 3% -20% 20% 368 Mtoe 10% 40% 20,000,000 (MRDPA). - EU Source: Romania – EU Partnership Agreement (2014-2020) Urban mass, Iași Growth Pole (left) and Timișoara Growth Pole (right) thinking on The pending proposal is more in line with EU-level territorial development, includes more clear criteria for classifying different cities, and also establishes a tentative economic profile for these urban centers, prioritizing investments tailored to the specific profile of each growth pole, in line with preferences expressed in existing integrated development plans. While further consultations are needed, this can be considered a strong start by any measure. Future refinements can also further consider the EC’s broader perspective on urban growth poles. While relatively diverse, including a high degree of flexibility in recognition of Member States’ specific development models and needs, the EC’s framework has evolved continuously, focusing increasingly on the three essential dimensions of development (also captured in the World Bank’s 2009 World Development Report): distance, density, and division. 15 Evolution of firm revenues in growth pole areas 9,000,000,000 € 8,000,000,000 € Constanţa 7,000,000,000 € Cluj-Napoca Revenues (Euro) 6,000,000,000 € Timişoara There are several recommendations worth Ploieşti 5,000,000,000 € Braşov 4,000,000,000 € Iaşi considering for the future growth poles policy (2014-2020). Craiova 3,000,000,000 € 2,000,000,000 € 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Data source: ListăFirme development For one, economic principles and practice teach that is inherently uneven: for a country’s economy to grow, some regions have to grow faster than others. Firm revenue growth in growth poles Growth Pole (%) 2011/2008 Rank (%) 2011/2006 Rank continue encouraging ongoing As such, the ROP should Braşov 1% #6 19% #4 external regional convergence and not resist the Cluj-Napoca Constanţa 12% 9% #2 31% 31% #2 growing internal regional divergence, which in the long #3 #2 term will generate faster growth, optimal outcomes, and eventually ensure Craiova 7% #5 15% #6 similar living standards across the country. In other words, higher growth in Iaşi 8% #4 17% #5 some cities means that more endogenous sources will be generated and could Ploieşti 12% #2 23% #3 be redistributed to help with key public investment projects in slower-growth areas. Timişoara 24% #1 38% #1 România 8% 28% All 7 Growth Poles 11% 27% Data source: ListăFirme 17 Equally important, rather than targeting public investments and programs at cities, the ROP should place at its core the people living in those areas. Better productivity and sustainable economic growth ultimately hinges on the realization that an economy is the sum of its people. The implication is that decision-makers should enable people’s access to opportunities, rather than create opportunities from scratch in areas where the market does not lead to such outcomes in the absence of the government’s intervention. Moreover, given current demographic and migration trends, the new growth poles policy should remain realistic about what is feasible: in short, if success means that all growth poles are performing equally well (e.g., having a growing population and a more powerful local economy), it may be doomed to fail from the start; if, however, it will focus on the productivity of the people living in the growth poles, it may very well have a meaningful impact. 19 In practice, the implications of this new paradigm for the future growth poles policy include the following recommendations: 1 Better definitions of intervention areas around growth poles based on functional criteria: The current legal framework does not specify why the 30 kilometer buffer was preferred and risks missing out on integration benefits beyond this limited buffer. Functional synergies, such as those deduced from commuter data, would likely lead to more optimal metropolitan areas. the status quo system also Moreover, fails to address situations where localities refuse to join metropolitan associations, which limits the potential to develop truly integrated projects and take full advantage of an area’s economic mass. 21 2 More targeted interventions based Potential functional areas are larger than the currently defined metropolitan areas Driving Buffers on specific contextual factors for around major cities 20 min. each growth pole: 40 min. 60 min. Data for the 20, 40, 60-minute driving buffers from city centers, 60 min. from city border and for 60-minute buffers from city outskirts, show that different growth poles have different Iaşi Cluj-Napoca Timişoara strengths at different sizes. For example, considering a 20 -minute driving buffer, Cluj-Napoca has both Braşov the largest population and the highest share of firm revenues of the seven growth poles. Within a 40-minute driving buffer, Ploieşti Constanța dominates. At the 60-minute limit (both from the Constanţa Craiova center city and from the city border), Timișoara ranks first in economic terms (with the largest share of firm revenues), Bucureşti while Craiova prevails in demographic terms (with the largest population in the area). 1. Downtown Cluj-Napoca; 2. The Port of Agigea, South of Constanţa; Key indicators for different-sized growth pole functional areas (2011) 3. Timişoara, Industrial Area, detail; 4. Işalniţa, an example of a densely populated village near Craiova. Driving time buffer from city center 60 min. 20 min. 40 min. 60 min. from city border Population 350,000 452,000 757,000 945,000 Timişoara % of National Firm Revenues 6.00% 3.16% 3.41% 5.43% Population 360,000 482,000 620,000 905,000 Cluj-Napoca % of National Firm Revenues 3.29% 3.48% 3.71% 4.47% Population 328,000 423,000 582,000 943,000 Iaşi % of National Firm Revenues 1.47% 1.52% 1.60% 2.20% Craiova Population % of National Firm Revenues 302,000 470,000 787,000 1,080,000 2.94% 1 2 1.43% 1.60% 2.70% Population 312,000 492,000 620,000 716,000 Constanţa % of National Firm Revenues 2.51% 4.12% 4.54% 4.67% Population 328,000 485,000 615,000 868,000 Braşov % of National Firm Revenues 2.65% 2.83% 2.98% 3.54% Population 305,000 556,000 2,724,000* 3,554,000* Ploieşti % of National Firm Revenues 2.89% 3.44% 43.17%* 47.24%* Population 1,842,000 2,150,000 2,525,000 4,020,000 Bucureşti % of National Firm Revenues 37.82% 41.15% 41.61% 50.58% Data Source: National Institute of Statistics and ListăFirme *Includes figures for București and its surroundings 4 3 23 Zipf distribution in Romania, for 2012 6.5 3 Policies adapted to the expected Bucureşti 6 evolution of growth poles: 5.5 In most countries that have developed organically, cities follow a a statistical oddity ara oc Log of Population tan i Iaş va Cr ţ a ap a uniform distribution pattern, işo aio j-N known as the Zipf Rule or the Rank-Size Rule. Tim ns Clu 5 Co The latest census data (2012) show that cities in Romania are realigning themselves around a city distribution that one 4.5 would expect to see in a market economy, with the largest city followed by 1-2 cities of about half the population, then 4 by 2-3 rank 3 cities of about a third the population, and so Cluj-Napoca and Timișoara on. In particular, 3.5 are emerging as Rank 2 cities behind 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 București. Log of Rank Demographic shifts in the largest Romanian cities New construction in Cluj-Napoca (left) and Timișoara (right) Census Population 2002 Rank 2012 Rank % Change Bucureşti 1,934,449 #1 1,883,425 #1 -2.64% Cluj-Napoca 318,027 #3 324,576 #2 2.06% Timişoara 317,651 #4 319,279 #3 0.51% Iaşi 321,580 #2 290,422 #4 -9.69% Constanţa 310,526 #5 283,872 #5 -8.58% Craiova 302,622 #6 269,506 #6 -10.94% Braşov 298,584 #7 253,200 #7 -15.20% Galaţi 283,901 #8 249,432 #8 -12.14% Ploieşti 232,452 #9 209,945 #9 -9.68% Oradea 206,527 #10 196,367 #10 -4.92% Source: National Institute of Statistics, Census data 25 Population (left) and economic (right) gravitational models 4 Planning for growth poles beyond defined metropolitan boundaries based on each area’s economic growth potential: Gravitational models show several potential con-urbations and growth corridors that could benefit from integrated planning Note: The population gravitational model used Census 2012 population numbers, while the and investments: București-Ploiești-Brașov; București- economic gravitational model used firm revenues data for 2011. Data was obtained from the Pitești; the area framed by Iași, Botoșani, Suceava, Piatra National Institute of Statistics and ListăFirme. Neamț, and Bacău; the area framed by Cluj-Napoca, Târgu- Mureș, Sibiu, and Alba-Iulia; and the Timișoara-Arad growth corridor. The Sustainable Development Strategy for Brașov Metropolitan Area 2012- 2020 (left), The Development Strategy for the Alba Iulia Municipality (right) 5 Truly integrated programs: Ideally, integrated development plans (IDPs) would include a comprehensive action plan, with a list of projects to be financed from the ROP, from other EU sources, as well as from the local and national budget. These programs should also explore ways to benefit larger metropolitan areas and multiple sectorsto enable optimal synergies. In this sense, new instruments planned under the next EU programing exercise, such as Integrated Territorial Investments, should be utilized to ensure proper funding and implementation mechanisms for integrated programs. 27 (clockwise from top-left) Piatra Neamţ, Oradea, Alba-Iulia and Râmnicu Vâlcea 6 Keep the same number of growth poles (if regions stay the same), but consider having a different number of urban development poles: A look at firm revenue data indicates that the current growth poles are indeed the main economic engines within their respective regions – each generating at least 20% of there is a larger regional firm revenues. However, number of cities than the current 13 urban development poles, which help regional growth. Thus, it may pay to consider designating all county capitals, outside the growth poles themselves, as urban development poles. 7 Consider the polarizing effect of Demographic (left) and economic (right) gravitational model for the South Region București within the South Region: Targovişte Targovişte All the data indicates that București has the strongest Ploieşti Ploieşti polarization effect within the South Region, and development Piteşti Piteşti Slobozia Slobozia planning for the South Region cannot be done with București outside the picture. An option would also be to absorb Călăraşi Călăraşi the București-Ilfov Region within the South Region, and have București-Ploiești as the main Alexandria Alexandria Giurgiu Giurgiu regional growth corridor. 29 8 The LHDI for 2002 (top) and 2011 (bottom) Regions Design proper monitoring and LHDI Index by Locality in 2002 evaluation mechanisms: Very poor Poor Lower-middle developed Finding the right indicators is critical both for the proper design Middle developed of a growth poles policy and for monitoring the performance Upper-middle developed Developed of such a policy. Ideally, these indicators would be easy Upper developed to collect and easy to interpret. Two basic performance indicators that are collected annually are population and firm revenues, and they give a good base- line indication of an area’s performance. A longer term performance review could make use of more complex and comprehensive composite indicators, such as the Local Human Development Index developed by Dumitru Sandu. Regions Firm Revenues by District in Romania, in 2011 LHDI Index by Locality in 2011 Cities w/ Pop. >50,000 and <100,000 Satu-Mare Cities w/ Pop. >100,000 Very poor Botoşani Suceava Firm Revenues (in Euro) Poor Baia Mare in 2011 Lower-middle developed 0 - 22,293,030 Middle developed Zalău Iaşi 22,293,031 - 72,920,503 Oradea Bistriţa 72,920,504 - 151,848,207 Upper-middle developed Piatra-Neamţ Cluj-Napoca 151,848,208 - 295,925,442 Developed Roman Vaslui 295,925,443 - 552,642,494 Upper developed Turda Târgu Mureş Bacău 552,642,495 - 1,069,128,770 1,069,128,771 - 1,877,949,680 Oneşti Bârlad 1,877,949,681 - 3,008,362,992 Arad Alba Iulia Mediaş 3,008,362,993 - 6,472,648,951 Timişoara Deva Sfântu Gheorghe 6,472,648,952 - 77,161,704,756 Hunedoara Sibiu Braşov Focşani Galaţi Petroşani Brăila Tulcea Reşiţa Râmnicu Vâlcea Buzău Târgu Jiu Târgovişte Ploieşti Drobeta-Turnu Severin Piteşti Slobozia Slatina Bucureşti Craiova Călăraşi Constanţa Alexandria Giurgiu Data source: Dumitru Sandu Note: The blank spots indicate localities for which no data was available Data Source: National Institute of Statistics 31 Governance structure of growth poles Ministry of Economy and Finance Ministry of Regional Development 9 Designing robust governance structures for growth poles: Institutional frameworks governing growth poles and ensuring implementation Growth Pole Regional Leader Development Agency (assisted by an executive apparatus) and monitoring of IDPs, should include both representing the structures representing and mobilizing local communities’ Growth Pole Intercommunity Development interest as well as specially designated regional/central Coordinator Association support. More attention needs to be given to capacity (assisted by technical (composed of representatives of all building and generation of an enabling legal and regulatory staff) growth pole area member environment for such institutions. communities) Technical assistance projects supporting the activity of growth pole coordinators offices No Growth Pole Total budget Total eligible Total solicited and % requested expenses approved eligible (in RON) (in RON) expenses (up to May 2013) 1 Braşov 3.579.459 3.262.309 1.340.961 41,10 2 Cluj-Napoca 2.583.310 2.386.080 696.781 29,20 3 Constanţa 4.044.874 3.629.125 1.536.389 42,33 4 Craiova 2.324.990 2.087.881 813.721 38,97 5 Iaşi 3.462.592 3.109.660 1.354.182 43,55 6 Ploieşti 4.058.816 3.626.877 1.451.426 40,02 7 Timişoara 1.776.405 1.650.491 622.362 37,71 Source: data processed from www.poat.ro, valid by May 2013 Note: in italic - the growth poles that do not correspond with the location of the main headquarters of RDAs. 33 Performance Indicators of Growth Poles IDAs No Growth Pole Name of IDA Year of No of Total Total Fixed 10 Consider alternative governance structures to IDAs: establish- ment employees (full time revenues (RON) expendi- ture assets (RON) It is obvious that the current IDA set-up has many contracts) (RON) shortcomings with respect to effective metropolitan governance. For one, center cities tend to dominate these 1 Braşov Metropolitan Agency for 2006 25 2.937.098 2.908.505 738.195 Sustainable Development associations. In addition: smaller localities lack the needed Brașov co-financing for truly metropolitan projects; politics often gets in the way of project implementation at the metropolitan level; and IDAs are primarily used as a vehicle for attracting 2 Cluj-Napoca Intercommunity 2008 no balance sheet recorded Development Association ROP funds and nothing more. As such, national and local establishment of Cluj Metropolitan Area authorities may consider the 3 Craiova Intercommunity 2009 3 62 67.679 - metropolitan development agencies, Development Association which could draw on a very rich international experience, Craiova Metropolitan Area and on the good performance of the regional development agencies. 4 Constanţa Intercommunity 2007 14 2.170.595 1.912.124 40.942 Development Association Constanța Metropolitan Area London Metropolitan Area (London Commuter Belt) 5 Iaşi Iași Metropolitan Area 2004 7 697.468 733.072 4.828 Association 6 Ploieşti Intercommunity 2009 8 733.606 568.477 34.154 Development Association “Ploiești-Prahova Growth Pole” 7 Timişoara Intercommunity 2009 - 7.071 15.472 7.770 Development Association “Timişoara Growth Pole” Source of data: MFinante.ro, as per the last reporting documents recorded (2011) Source: Office for National Statistics, United Kingdom 35 11 List of poles of competitiveness submitted for funding Ensure better policy correlations: No Growth Pole Economic profiles, Name of pole of competitiveness Economic profile of pole as set by IDP initiated (application submitted to of competitiveness MA SOP IEC) As growth poles are designed, essentially, as economic 1 Braşov technologies for no project submitted n/a engines of the regions where they are located, growth poles sustainable development, policy should seek to correlate and build on economic tourism development policies. Recent initiatives of the Ministry 2 Cluj-Napoca energy industry, ITC, TREC - Transnational Renewable Renewable energies of Economy have illustrated interest in aterritorial perspective over industrial policy and business support services, Energies Cluster* specialized medical Transylvanian Furniture Cluster Furniture private sector support via clusters and services, biotechnologies POLARIS ICT EXCELSIOR – EXCELency in ICT poles of competitiveness. Such initiatives may Information Systems Oriented Towards Results 3 Craiova IT and high technologies ICT – Regional Competitiveness Pole ICT complement the growth poles policy by providing the funding mechanisms and catalyzing Automotive Sud Vest Oltenia Pole Automotive industry INOVTRANS Rolling stock manufacturing TurOlt InTT – Innovation and traditions in Oltenia Tourism the business environments in each growth pole. 4 Constanţa maritime industry, tourism, no project submitted n/a energy industry, agro-food Palace of the Parliament, București. 5 Iaşi ITC, new/creative no project submitted n/a industries 6 Timişoara automotive industry and AUTOMOTIVEST Association Automotive industry ICT ICT Regional Cluster ICT Romanian Sustainable Energy Green energy Cluster* (manufacturing of equipment) El Camino Constructions 7 Ploieşti oil industry, energy CREVIS ICT industry Aircraft production Pole of competitiveness in the field of automatic systems and robotics Source: data processed from MA SOP IEC and IDPs of each growth pole Note: TREC (Cluj Napoca) and ROSENC (Timișoara) have joined MedGreen to submit a common application for MA SOP IEC. For this reason, they do not show up as standalone applicants on the MA SOP IEC list. Source: Shutterstock 37