Centrally Planned Urbanization: The Case of Romania

Author(s): Per Ronns

Source: Geografiska Annaler. Series B, Human Geography, Vol. 64, No. 2 (1982), pp. 143-151
Published by: Wiley on behalf of the Swedish Society for Anthropology and Geography
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/490668
Accessed: 06-09-2015 12:52 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Wiley and Swedish Society for Anthropology and Geography are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to Geografiska Annaler. Series B, Human Geography.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 217.112.157.102 on Sun, 06 Sep 2015 12:52:14 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CENTRALLY PLANNED URBANIZATION:

THE CASE OF ROMANIA
BY

PERRONNAS*
ABSTRACT. Urbanizationin centrally planned economies
takes place underother conditionsthan in marketeconomies
and displays a number of particularfeatures. Theories elaboratedfrom studies in marketeconomies are of limited use
when appliedto centrally plannedeconomies. Yet, centrally
plannedurbanizationhas received little attentionby western
scholars. The focus of the present paper is on post-WW II
urbanizationin Romania.Followinga discussion on some of
the implicationsof centralplanningon urbanizationand on the
means availablefor policy implementation,the actual developmentis studiedin the lightof the officialpolicies.

Background
Romania emerged from WW-I as a heteroeconomically,
geneous country--culturally,
ethnically and socially. The former Austro-Hungarian regions - Bucovina, Banat, Crigana,
Maramure? and Transylvania-had been more
open to the impact of the industrial revolution
than the provinces on the opposite side of the
Carpathians, which until 1877 had been under
Ottoman suzerainty. Transylvania in particular
had a rather advanced urban network. In Vallachia (Muntenia and Oltenia) industrialization had
been strongly concentrated to Bucureati and the
Prahova Valley, while on the Danubian Plain and
in Oltenia towns were far apart and predominantly agricultural. With few exceptions, towns in
Moldavia were agro-commercial.
The interwar economy was characterized by
increasingly depressed conditions in agriculture,
due to the fragmentation of holdings, decreasing
productivity and stagnant yields. Employment in
manufacturing increased at a slow rate and failed
to absorb the labour surplus in agriculture
(Ronnis, 1980). Neither industrial growth, nor
increasing standards of living were the main
promoter of urbanization in the interwar period,
but rather the pauperization of the peasantry.
Many peasants were forced to seek supplementary income from non-farm activities and many
eventually ended up as permanent town

* Civ. ekon. Per Ronnas,Dept. of Geography,Stockholm

School of Economics,Box 6501, 11383 Stockholm,Sweden

Centrally planned urbanization

Centrally planned industrialization characterized
urban development in Romania after WW-II.
Forceful industrialization led to rapid increase in
non-farm employment, while collectivization
and mechanization of agriculture faciliated the
transfer of labour from the primary to the secondary and tertiary sectors. Central planning undoubted has particular implications on the urban
development although no control group in the
form of an urban system in a market economy is
available for comparison. No attempt will be
made to present a complete theory of urbanization under socialism, but a few suggestions
should nevertheless be made.
- The socialist ideology in Romania has a strong
urban bias and urbanization is considered to
have a value per se. Secondary activities, and
especially heavy manufacturing industry, are
given priority over primary as well as tertiary
activities (Ceaugescu, 1965; PCR, 1972; PCR,
1975).
- Highly centralized planning and decision making tend to lead to geographic concentration
unless the regional perspective is emphasized
through a forceful regional policy.
- If sectorial planning dominates over regional
planning, urban places will tend to be
apprehended as mere points of concentration
of manufacturing activities (Kansky, 1976).

64 B (1982)

GEOGRAFISKA ANNALER

dwellers. Urban growth was highly concentrated

to Bucureati, which increased its share of the
total urban population from 16.5 % in 1912 to
21.3 % in 1930, to 28.1 % in 1948. Although the
urban population grew considerably, the increase in the urbanization was quite small (Fig.
1) and Romania's character as a pronounced
peasant state was never seriously challenged in
the interwar period. In 1930 some 79 % of the
population was still rural and the non-farm population was only 28 %. By 1948 the urban population had increased by merely two percentage
units.

This content downloaded from 217.112.157.102 on Sun, 06 Sep 2015 12:52:14 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

143

RONNAS
%

Maramures

Romania
%

50-

50-

10-

10

0I
1910

h111

l 1If IlI

20

30

I Ii I f I I
ITII

50

40

60

if

70

1980

I
111fli t ]III

1910

Crisana-Banat
50

40-

40-

30

30

20

20

10-

10-

ii
20

30

111I

30

MtJ tl
11111iif

40

If

50

1111If

60

70

1980

Transyvania

50

01910

20

40

1i
50

60r rIil l0
70
60

1980

1
1910

i
ii I i3 11 l lill
1114
20
30
40

50

t i
Ii i I liIi
60
70

80
1980

Figure 1. Urbanization in Romania

Sources:
N6pszamlilasa (1910) (1941); Recensimintul (1930) (1941) (1948) (1956) (1966) (1977).
Remarks:
The figures show urbanization broken down on (a) changes in intercensal urban cohorts and (b) changes due to
administrative measures. The latter is given by vertical lines at the end of each intercensal period, while the
gradients of the lines between census points show the former.

- Towns and villages do not exist in their own

right, but their existence is justified only by
their contribution to society. Their progress,
or regress, according to this implicit, but basic, idea in socialist regional planning, depends
on their role and hierarchical place in the na144

tional economy. The growth initiative only to a

very limited extent lies within the town itself
and towns are not allowed to compete for resources (PCR, 1972; Blaga, 1974; Sampson,
1980).
- The administrative division and the official

This content downloaded from 217.112.157.102 on Sun, 06 Sep 2015 12:52:14 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

64 B (1982)

GEOGRAFISKA ANNALER

CENTRALLY PLANNED URBANIZATION-

%50-

Muntenia(M)

Oltenia
%
50

40-

40-

30-

30

20-

20

10-

10

0-

011o-1111

1910

20

30

40

50

60

70

117

Bucureqti (B)

01

1910

1980

20

30

40

50

60

70

Iii
40

50

60

III 11
70
1980

1980

Moldavia

Dobrogea
50-

50-

40-

40-

30--

30-

20

20

10

10

ROMANIA

ll i iItf lli I i 11
ll 11
i
1I1111 1I1111 II 1 1 11 I IIII II 1 1 1
1980
1910
20
30
50
60
70
40

0-1910

status of localities are of major importance as

the administrative map is used for regional
planning and for the channeling of investments. Regional imbalances will seldom be
perceived by central planners unless reflected
in statistics on administrative regions. Resources tend to be concentrated to the main
centre of the region and the regional distribution of resources is thus strongly influenced by
the administrative division (Ceaugescu, 1968;
Blaga, 1974).

i
20

30

- The stress on secondary activities leads to a

more dominant position for manufacturing in
the economic base of towns than in market
economy countries and the tendency to favour
large scale industrial plants leads to the domination of a single industry in many towns.
Almost complete control over places of work,
housing and the distribution of food and other
consumer goods provides the government with a
powerful instrument for control of urban growth,

GEOGRAFISKA ANNALER - 64 B (1982) - 2

This content downloaded from 217.112.157.102 on Sun, 06 Sep 2015 12:52:14 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

145

RONNAS

ideally a perfect mastering of urban development. In reality a number of factors diminish

effectiveness, particularly in the short run. Long
term goals for regional development may easily
be in conflict with short term efficiency goals.
Besides, a considerable part of new jobs are in
existing plants. Housing, too, is decidedly a long
term investment. Although regional variations in
the distribution of food and consumer goods
exist, this has not been used in the implementation of regional policy. Poor provisioning of
towns with food may eventually slow down
rural-urban migration and promote rural-urban
commuting.
To establish residence in another town or
commune, a residence visum must be obtained
from the local police. The granting of visa provides a direct mean of controlling migration. In
order to curb in-migration the granting of residence visa is severely restricted in fourteen of
the largest cities (Decretul, 1976/68).
In spite of potent instruments the government
seems to have far from perfect knowledge as to
the whereabouts of the population. A comparison of officially estimated and actual population
figures for 1977 reveal large differences, Table 1.
Table 1. Estimated and actual urban population in 1977.

Arad
Brajov
Briila
BucureSti
Cluj
Constanta
Craiova
Galati
Iaji
PiteSti
Ploielti
Sibiu
Timijoara
Tirgu Murej
Total large
cities
Total urban

1966
Actual

1977
Estimated Actual

Error %

126.0
163.3
138.6
1,365.9
185.8
150.4
148.8
151.3
160.9
60.1
147.0
109.6
174.4
86.5

151.0
208.8
173.6
1,619.9
227.6
205.2
207.0
210.7
223.9
103.6
183.7
135.3
219.5
119.5

171.1
257.2
194.6
1,807.0
262.4
256.9
222.4
239.3
264.9
123.9
199.3
151.1
268.8
130.1

13
23
12
12
15
25
7
14
18
20
8
12
22
9

3,168.6
6,743.9

3,988.2
8,569.4

4,549.1
9,393.9

14
10

Sources: Anuarul Statistic (1968-1979); Recensamintul (1966:

Vol I) (1977: Vol I).
Remarks: Actual population based on census figures. Estimated population in 1977 calculated on the basis of a
trend analyses based on actual population in 1966
and officially estimated population in subsequent
years untill 1975.
Large cities are those where the restricted rules for
the granting of residence visa are applied.

146

Total urban population was 10 per cent larger

than expected and Bucureati alone had almost
200,000 more inhabitants than expected.
Postwar urban development: 1948-1966
The postwar period can be divided into two, the
first-from the late fourties until the mid-sixties-devoted to the creation of an industrial and
agricultural base on which to build an advanced
socialist society, and the second, with a more
balanced development- sectorially as well as
regionally- aiming for a 'multi-laterally developed socialist society' (PCR, 1975).
In the fifties rapid economic growth was the
main goal, regional development was little more
than a consequence of sectorial planning. The
regional pespective was further reduced as 18,
later 16, regions were substituted for the traditional division of the country into 58 counties.
Investments were concentrated to regions with a
well-developed economic base or with untapped
natural resources, much as in the interwar period, but in one important aspect the fifties
differed from that period. Bucureati's growth
rate slowed down considerably and remained below the national average throughout the postwar
period. A housing shortage and restrictive granting of residence visa hampered its growth.
The strong industrialization, with emphasise
on heavy industry, and the large administrative
regions were reflected in the urban growth
pattern. Industrial towns in general, and mining
or heavy industry towns in particular, grew faster than 'service towns'. Of nine towns that more
than doubled their population between 1948 and
1956, seven were mining or heavy industry
centres. Fifty-two of 171 towns grew at lower
rate than total population and eighteen actually
declined. Among the 52 were 22 former county
of their administracapitals, which-deprived
tive status and lacking strong mining or manufacturing base- stagnated.
An eloquent expression of the official view on
towns as primarily industrial centres was the degradation of fourteen towns to rural communes
between 1948 and 1956. All degraded towns were
agrocommercial centres with a poor manufacturing base. Most of them were located in economically backward areas and eight of them were in
Moldavia. In the same period some 33 rural
communes received urban status; 18 in Transylvania and 8 in Crigana-Banat. Most of the new
GEOGRAFISKA ANNALER - 64 B (1982)

2
?

This content downloaded from 217.112.157.102 on Sun, 06 Sep 2015 12:52:14 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CENTRALLY PLANNED URBANIZATION-

ROMANIA

towns were pronounced industrial centres and tion in a depressed rural area apparently was the
decisive factor (Cimpeni, Huedin, Negrejti-Oaj
many of them located near mineral resources.
In the 1956-1966 intercensal period the con- and Singeorz-Bii). Eight towns were in Transylcentration of urban growth to manufacturing and vania.
mining centres was somewhat less pronounced.
The growth rate of most mining and heavy industry towns decreased. Growth rates generally declined in the more developed Crigana, Banat and Regional policy since 1966
Transylvania and increased in Vallachia, Dobro- The administrative reform in 1968 marks the begea and Moldavia, but large intra-regional varia- ginning of a new era in which the regional aspect
tions persisted. In 1965 yet another 12 localities on development plays a much more important
received urban status; seven of them were cen- part. A more complex view on urban places
tres for heavy industry, but in four cases a loca- came to prevail, stressing centre-hinterland rela-

0o-Village-town
)

Vil.....,ageIndustriaio
oton
Service town

07

o
- " "-0,, dc%-?
,,)
-

0
S

,-

?
.... ;
r"'> /
+ e
. .

..

_-,

e
_

+ !+++++ ;

?)
.?7J

100Kin

00

o 50 1OK"
50

~0

o i

. e
zf Z+"t
t "+++++y+

,ge

r?

-?-$

4@2

1930

kl

o .,

% ?>

..' .

t'?i+iir...

1,5 1?

050"

-o

-(>+

E<

..

10

50

10
7....

100

700O (000

ih)
mh}

Figure 2, 3, 4 and 5. The Economic Structure of Romanian Towns.

Recensamintul (1930) (1956) (1966) (1977); William-Olsson (1974).
Sources:
More than 50 % of the population lives from agriculture and forestry.
Remarks:
Village:
Between 25 and 50 % in agriculture.
Village-town:
Less than 25 % in agriculture, more in secondary than in tertiary activities:
Industrial town:
Less than 25 % in agriculture, more in tertiary than in secondary activities.
Servicetown:
Manufacturing, mining and construction.
Secondary activities:
Credit, commerce, transportation and public institutions.
Tertiary activities:
Method elaborated by William-Olsson.
GEOGRAFISKA ANNALER

64 B (1982) - 2

This content downloaded from 217.112.157.102 on Sun, 06 Sep 2015 12:52:14 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

147

RONNAS

1956

( illage

0e

Village-town

I ndustrial

town
Service

/O

town.

.o

o*-

.e

e\
*

*SOO)

0o

oooooo

o"60

O1
.0.0
0

"-._1

:
0

e
00

-O K.

0--$0

T
.0 00.0-.
100
50

50

100

10

Km

300

0
1178 'O00inh)

Fig. 3.

fr

Village

f1966
f .

Industrial
town
l Village-ictwn

.... , ,nd
....
Service
town

0o

00

0-+?

o0

II@0/'

~(

00

oN

0
0

.u.

(U

oo0

o
"

000+++

N
++>2++

0\

/?e

0~
0

0)

Oo

CE) *

(O()0
00

(D

000

iB
qL,

00

01.

iiii~i:

"N2

I diliii~1
.....5

P
"-

..
i~i??liiiiil:-iiZ:i.ii+/,-,

37C
;.....

.."

00

Fig. 4.

148

50

00 K

50
0

ii

000)00)

GEOGRAFISKA ANNALER - 64 B (1982) - 2

This content downloaded from 217.112.157.102 on Sun, 06 Sep 2015 12:52:14 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CENTRALLY PLANNED URBANIZATION--ROMANIA

1977

C) Vilage'

Vl

()

agown

(.

Industrialtown

Servceetwn
0_;

(De

D
S...o

.....--

"2_.

'Q!+:+!i!++i+ ++"5+!+
+
'J +"++++sQ4
d+++ii+

o_

c e

..

.0. :

.e~ i++

i.

o ".. ....
.....

:+ik

+ . Ko e .. .:.+....
. .......:.....,
O
.,...?
+++f~O+++."
++++
,5.......
0)

K
@

0050

iOOKm

+.

0
50rn0
++1+(++i+ O ?
300++ii
:++i++++ii+~~ii+iT

Me

10

50

300

180t'00inh

Fig. 5.

tions and the role of the urban place as provider

of central functions and non-farm employment
opportunities and as diffuser of the urban, socialist culture to the rural hinterland (Ceaugescu,
1968). The 16 regions were changed to a division
into 40 counties (iudete), providing a finer instrument for regional policy. The counties were
designed to become socio-economic entities,
viable economic units that should rationally
employ their labour force and having an average
population of 450,000 (Ceaugescu, 1968). Central
position, rather than size, was the decisive criterium in the selection of the county capitals.
The administrative reform was followed by a
comprehensive 'systematization programme',
adopted in 1972, to structure all rural and urban
localities into a well-defined hierarchy with a
predetermined place and function for each locality and region (PCR, 1972). The programme is a
mean to control and direct the rapid urban transition, to create a new demographic and
economic map of Romania. Urbanization without excessive concentration of population and a
gradual phasing out of the socio-economic dif-

ferences between the rural and the urban subsets

are basic ideas in the programme. A differentiation of the rural localities according to their
economic potentials will take place and a large
number of villages will be transformed into
towns. By the year 2000 Romania is planned to
have 550-650 towns, as against 236 today.
Concomitant with the administrative reform,
urban boundaries were revised, in most cases
extended to include neighbouring villages, and
53 rural communes were declared urban. These
new towns differ from previously decreed towns
not only by their number, but also by their location and economic structure. They are evenly
distributed throughout the country, often located
in areas lacking other urban centres. Most of
them are considerably overboundered. In eight
cases the town proper accounted for less than
half the population in 1966. The economic base
in many cases was poorly developed. It is clear
that their location was decisive in the selection of
many. Often, they were decreed urban in anticipation of future development rather than in recognition of past performance.

GEOGRAFISKA ANNALER - 64 B (1982) - 2

This content downloaded from 217.112.157.102 on Sun, 06 Sep 2015 12:52:14 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

149

RONNAS

Postwar urban development: 1966-1977

Urban development since 1966 differs considerably from the preceding intercensal periods.
The pace increased, the average annual growth
rate of the urban system increased from 2.5 % in
1948-66 to 3.1 % in 1966-77, while the rural subset for the first time registered population decline. The structural change is even more impressive taking into account that the rural non-farm
population increased from 22.5 % to 40.9 % in
the same period. Rural-urban commuting
accounted for much, if not most, of the increase
in the share of rural non-farm population. In
contrast to previous periods, urban growth no
longer was concentrated to towns with a strong
manufacturing base. The poor growth of the mining and metalurgical centres in the Hunedoara
and Regita areas were striking. In the county of
Hunedoara, with Romania's largest concentration of heavy industry outside Bucureati, the
urban population engaged in mining and manufacturing actually decreased.
A major characteristic of urban development
in the seventies was the rapid growth of a large
number of previously slow-growing towns which
traditionally had a weak economic base, following the creation of a manufacturing environment.
Many new county capitals belong to this group.
Thus the industrial map of Romania became
much more homogeneous in the past decade and
all counties now have at least one major urban
and industrial centre. But the decrease in intercounty variation was often accompanied by increases in intracounty variations. In 31 och 39
counties the county capital grew faster than any
other town, and the county capitals increased
their share of the urban population, Bucureati
excluded, from 52.8 % in 1966 to 58.9 % in 1977.
The concentration to the county capital was particularly strong in economically backward counties. Ten of 16 towns increasing their population
by more than 75 % between 1966 and 1977 were
new capitals of relatively poor counties. For
example, in the least industrialized county,
35 % of the
Salaj, the capital-Zalau--had
county's urban population in 1966, but 81 % of
the urban growth 1966-1977.
The growth of the 53 towns decreed in 1968
varied considerably, 28 growing slower than the
national population and nine actually decreasing
in population. But poor growth should not necessarily be taken as a proof of failure to develop,
as increase in non-farm employment was often
150

met by the local supply of labour from the farm

sector. Another 129 rural communes were earmarked for urban status in 1980. Although many
experienced substantial socio-economic transformation after 1975, none had been declared
urban by early 1982.
The dominant position of the secondary
activities in the urban economy was further
strengthened in the seventies, Figure 4 and 5. It
is noteworthy that the relative increase in secondary employment took place, not only at the
expense of the primary sector but also of the
tertiary sector. This is in sharp contrast to the
development in Western Europe (William-Olsson, 1974). Most of the few 'service towns' left
are ports, railway nodes or spas. There was a
slight decrease in the number of towns dominated by a single industry. While 30 towns had a
concentration of 75 % or more of its secondary
population in one branch of manufacturing or
mining in 1966, this was the case in only 17 towns
in 1977. The number of towns with more than
half in one branch was 92 in 1966 and 74 in 1977.
References
Anuarul Statistic al RSR, 1966-1978: Bucure?ti, Directia
Centrali de Statistica.
Blaga, I. 1974: Repartizarea teritoriala a fortelor de productie
in Romdnia. Bucureqti.
Ceausescu, N., 1965: Raportul CC al PCR cu privire la activitatea partidului in perioada dintre congresul al VIII-lea ?i
congresul al IX-lea al PCR, 10 iulie 1965, in Romania pe
drumul desitrvfrgirii constructjei socialiste. Bucureqti.
- 1968: Expunere cu privire la imbundittirea organizirii
administrative a teritoriului RSR, 15 februarie 1968, in
Romdnia pe drumul destarvfrsirii constructjei socialiste,
Bucureqti.
Cucu, V. and Urucu, V., 1967: Creqterea oragelor din RSR in
ultimul deceniu. Revista de Statistica 67/5, Bucureqti.
Decretul 1976/68: Decretul 1976/68 privind schimbarea domiciliului din alte localitfii in orage declarate, potrivit legii,
orage mari, Colectia de Legi Si Decrete 1976/I, Bucureqti.
Kansky, K., 1976: Urbanization under Socialism: The Case of
Czechoslovakia. New York.
Measnicov, I., 1968a: Contributii la studiul migratiei interne in
Romdnia. Revista de Statistic6 68/8. Bucure~ti.
- 1968 b: Contributii la studiul migrauiei interne in RomAnia.
Migratiile interne in perioada 1941-48. Revista de Statistica
68/10. Bucuresti.
- 1969: Contributii la studiul migratiei interne in Romdnia,
Revista de Statistict 69/2. Bucureqti.
Nepszamlailsa, 1910: A Magyar szent korona orszigainak
1910,
Magyar Statisztikai K6zevi n6pszamlalasa.
lemenyek. Vol. 42. Budapest.
- 1941: Az 1941, evi nepszamlalas
el6zetes eredmenyei,
Magyar Statisztikai Szemle 1941/3-4. Budapest.
PCR, 1972: Conferinta Nationala a Partidului Comunist Roman. 19-21 iulie 1972. Bucuresti, Editura Politici.
- 1975: Programul Partidului Comunist
Roman de faurirea

This content downloaded from 217.112.157.102 on Sun, 06 Sep 2015 12:52:14 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

64 B (1982)

GEOGRAFISKA ANNALER

CENTRALLY PLANNED URBANIZATIONsocietdtii socialiste multilateral dezvoltate #i 'naintarea

Romdniei spre comunism. Bucureqti, Editura Politicdi.
Recensdmintul, 1940: Recensamintul general al populatjei
Romdniei din 29 decembrie 1930, Vol. I-X. Bucureqti.
- 1941: Recenstamintul general al Romaniei din 1941, 6
aprilie (1941). Date sumare ?i provizorii. Bucureati.
- 1948: Populatia RPR la 25 ianuarie 1948; Rezultatele provizorii ale recensimintului. Probleme Economice 1948/2.
Bucureqti.
- 1956: Recensdmintul populatjei din 21 februarie 1956: Rezultate generale. Bucureqti.
- 1966: Recensd mintul populatiiei i locuint~elordin 15 martie

ROMANIA

1966, Vol. I-VIII. Bucureqti.

1977: Recensimintul populatjei si locuint,elor din 5 ianuarie
1977, Vol. I-II. Bucureqti.
Ronnas, P., 1980: The urban transition in Romania: The interwar period. Research Paper 6165. Stockholm, EFI.
Sampson, S., 1980: National Integration Through Socialist
Planning: An Anthropological Study of a Romanian New
Town. Dissertation. Univ. of Massachusetts.
William-Olsson, W., 1954: An Economic Map of Europe.
Stockholm.
- 1974: An Economic Map of Europe West of the Soviet
Union. Stockholm.
-

GEOGRAFISKAANNALER 64 B (1982) 2
?

This content downloaded from 217.112.157.102 on Sun, 06 Sep 2015 12:52:14 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

151