Discussion Papers 1999.
Spatial Research in Support of the European Integration 31-42. p.
THE NEW ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION OF POLAND
31
THE NEW ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION OF POLAND
ANDRZEJ STASIAK
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS
The problems of the administrative territorial division of the country constitute a
very important element of the wider policy and strategy of the development of the
state and the society. The various choices are conditioned by multiple factors, such as:
(1) the natural environment (broadly defined as mountainous areas, large
rivers, boggy areas, or lakes), which may hinder accessibility to centres of
public administration, while lowlands through which few large rivers flow,
facilitate such access;
(2) geopolitical circumstances
the necessity of formation of administrative
—
units along the state borders;
(3) economic factors, e.g. the zones of extraction of definitive raw materials or
the large industrial regions force the establishment of smaller spatial
units in view of high population concentration, while agricultural areas,
where population density is low, may be broken down into larger territor-
ial units;
(4) ethnic factors, which can generate motivations to various solutions — the
"local" population constituting the majority over a given territory would
tend to create the homogeneous units, while the central government
would as a rule display quite contrary tendencies;
(5) the historically shaped settlement and transport systems
this factor playing
—
an important role in view of the large "inertia" of the fixed assets and the
respective infrastructure, related to the very high costs of establishing
new settlement and transport infrastructure.
The factors listed above have to a large extent an objective nature, but one must be
aware that they are ultimately not decisive for the final decisions concerning the
administrative division. In my opinion, based upon the experience of Poland, but also
from other countries, the decisive factors are the political factors. These political fac-
tors have, of course, to somehow account for the objective ones — i.e. for such as, e.g.
transport accessibility, social and technical infrastructure available within the potential
centres of public administration, as well as the attitudes of the population. For a
broader consideration of this subject, see the relevant reports of the Institute of
Geography and Spatial Organization' and of the Committee for the Spatial
Development of the Country 2, Polish Academy of Sciences.
Andrzej Stasiak : The New Administrative Division of Poland.
In: Spatial Research in Support of the European Integration. Pécs, Centre for Regional Studies,
1999. 31-42. p. Discussion papers . Special
32
ANDRZEJ STASIAK
THE FORMS OF ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION
After these introductory remarks one should add yet that the administrative division
has as a rule a hierarchical character, allowing for the transmission of the actions of the
central administration downwards. Naturally, depending upon the systemic forms of the
state, and the stages of development of the civil society, this hierarchy can be more or
less centralised, that is, the range of actions of the units of administrative division of
the lower level may secure for them a bigger or lesser margin of independence in the
functioning of public administration, the subject to which we will later return. The pre-
sent tendency of the majority of societies in Europe is aimed at limiting the omnipo-
tence of the state, especially at the lower levels of the administrative division, and at
ensuring the significant increase of responsibility of the local societies — and partly also
the regional ones — for the economy and for the socio-economic development of these
units.
Thus, we are currently dealing as a rule with the following situation in the manage-
ment of space of a given country. We have public administration which is divided into:
(1) governmental administration (central and territorial), responsible for the
general management of the country and the supervision of the regional
and local administration;
(2) self-governmental administration, as a rule responsible for the local
administration and partly also for regional administration (at the latter
level the mixed forms prevail).
In terms of the hierarchy of the administrative division we also have a certain choice
of designs. There are, in principle, two systems of the division of the country's space:
the three tier and two tier ones. The differences between them are as follows:
-
-
(1) The three-tier division is usually characterised by:
—division into large regions or provinces, known in Poland as voivod-
ships;
—subdivision into smaller units, bearing various country-specific
names (county, Kreis, district or — in Poland — powiat);
—local units, generally being referred to as communes, e.g. gmina in
Poland, Gemeinde in Germany.
(2) The two-tier division is characterised by:
—division into a much bigger number of provinces (in Poland: voivod-
ships);
—local units equivalent to communes (gmina).
Thus we can see that in the second case there is no intermediate level, the powiat,
located between a medium-sized province (voivodship) and the local unit (commune).
The supporters of the two-tier division say that, owing to the development of trans-
port and communication, the intermediate link
powiat or county — which was indis-
—
pensable in the era of horse-driven transport, has become a relic. They argue that
emphasis should instead be placed on the development of the local self-governments
at the level of communes, through, in particular, an increase of the potential of these
Andrzej Stasiak : The New Administrative Division of Poland.
In: Spatial Research in Support of the European Integration. Pécs, Centre for Regional Studies,
1999. 31-42. p. Discussion papers . Special
THE NEW ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION OF POLAND
33
units by merging of communes (decrease of their number) and by formation of the
communal associations (this taking place, for instance, in Sweden). I continue to sup-
port this concept.
The supporters of the three-tier division maintain that the growing role of the
regional development planning and formation of the strategies of regional develop-
ment requires the existence of larger provinces: regions, since only such units can fulfil
these tasks. The leading example quote here is constituted by Germany 3.
As we know, starting on January 1, 1999, the two-tier division will be replaced in
Poland by the three-tier one. In both types of division a very important role is played
by the local self government functioning at the level of the commune-type unit &mina),
-
and in the three-tier system also at the level of the intermediate link of powiat (Kreis,
county or district).
THE ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION OF POLAND
Until 1939, then a country of 35 million inhabitants and surface area of some
390,000 km2, Poland had used the three-tier system of spatial division. There were 17
voivodships, including one urban voivodship, i.e. the capital city of Warsaw, 264 powiat,
including 23 urban powiat separated from the respective surrounding ones (the so-
called town powiat), and 3,195 gmina4. The self-governmental bodies were well devel-
oped at the levels of communes and towns. The decisive role in the powiat was played
by the officer of the state administration, the starost. The voivodships, with the excep-
tion of the Silesian voivodship, had a very limited scope of self-governmental compe-
tence. The voivodships were headed by a high official of the state administration — the
voivod (province governor).
After 1945, after the westwards shift of the boundaries of Poland, the necessity
arose of establishing a new organisation of Polish space. Until 1950 there were 14
voivodships and 300 powiat. The commune, the gmina still constituted the lowest level
unit. In 1950, when Poland had 312 powiat, 17 territorial voivodships were established,
along with 5 urban voivodships encompassing the 5 largest towns (Warsaw, Lodi,
Cracow, Wroclaw and Poznan).
Thus until 1975 we had had 22 voivodships (including 5 urban voivodships), some
300 powiat (with more than 60 urban powiat), and more than 2,000 gmina. Let us add
here that for the purposes of regional planning the urban voivodships were included in
the respective territorial provinces. Therefore regional planning was conducted for 17
regions. There was a similar situation with the urban powiat, which were in planning
terms included in the respective territorial powiat. Formally, participation of the popu-
lation in public administration was very high, as a result of the introduction of the
socialist system of the National Councils, starting at the level of the voivodship,
through powiat, down to the communes, this system linking the territorial state admin-
istration with the self-governmental one, by means of the so-called uniform system of
public administration.
Andrzej Stasiak : The New Administrative Division of Poland.
In: Spatial Research in Support of the European Integration. Pécs, Centre for Regional Studies,
1999. 31-42. p. Discussion papers . Special
34
ANDRZEJ STASIAK
As it is well known, however, this was only a paper democracy, the "people's democ-
racy", within which all actual decisions were taken at all levels (provincial, county and
communal) by the respective party committees of the PUWP (Polish United Workers'
Party), strictly subordinated to the Central Committee of PUWP in Warsaw.
A certain novelty was introduced with the administrative reform of 1975, which
introduced the two-tier system, eliminating the intermediate level of the powiat, and
dividing up the country into 49 medium-sized voivodships, and playing an important
role in the local management of the sub-communal units, whilst still under the supervi-
sion of the party officers. This reform has certainly allowed for relatively fast develop-
ment of the smaller and medium-sized towns, those which became the capitals of new
voivodships. In this manner Polish provincial areas obtained an essential stimulus, also
in terms of investments, including expansion and construction of the voivodship hospi-
tals, research centres, universities, cultural institutions, and mass transport, the stimu-
lus which lasted for more than twenty years. Note that among the "new" voivodship
capitals there were as many as 11, whose population did not exceed 40,000. Together,
there were 16 with population below 50,000 and only 5 in which more than 100,000
people lived.
In 1996 there were only 4 capitals of the "new" voivodships with less than 50,000
inhabitants, and as many as 13 of them exceeded 100,000 inhabitants. This is proof of
the essential significance of the role played by the administrative division introduced in
1975 for the development of Polish provincial areas 5 . (Figures 1, 2) Naturally, the
development of these smaller voivodship centres constrained to a degree the develop-
ment possibilities of the previous 17 voivodship capitals, but in my opinion this was
certainly advantageous for the Polish provincial areas. One should add that the towns
which had been previously the county seats had in principle not lost their role of local —
and even often supralocal — centres, since in 270 of them the administrative districts
were located.
Post-1990, during the phase of socio-economic transformation, the wave of a lively
discussion on the subject of administrative division of Poland returned. The strongest
supporters of the re-establishment of the three-tier system, composed of the large
provinces, corresponding to regions, powiat and communes &mina), were divided
between two political groups. The first of these two groups were the post-communists
of the SLD, who had, and still have, the hope of strengthening their party structures at
the powiat level and the liberals, the present Union of Freedom (UW), who shared
similar views. The whole discussion was taking place, of course, under the banner of
the increased role of territorial self-government and the local societies. Liberals were
also putting forward the idea of dividing Poland into 8-12 large regions, supposedly
facilitating our entry into the European Union. A clear opposition to the concepts of
the three-tier division was represented by only one significant political force, the Polish
Peasant Party (PSL), arguing that this would bring the decline of the provincial cen-
tres. I personally agreed with this view. The largest political power, Solidarity, repre-
sented through the AWS electoral block, remained initially neutral in this respect.
Andrzej Stasiak : The New Administrative Division of Poland.
In: Spatial Research in Support of the European Integration. Pécs, Centre for Regional Studies,
1999. 31-42. p. Discussion papers . Special
THE NEW ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION OF POLAND
35
Figure 1
Cities with over 50 000 inhabitants, 1950
I szcawin
So!yak •
• .„
Czes®hews
\'
°Opole
Number of
inhabitants
c,
(thousands)
12 over 500
•
201 - 500
•
101 - 200
Cheat*
s‘.
•
76 - 100
Br.,
...
sio.is..
1.,4,
. 1
•.,
0
Bedzia
I
i..../
\...
Zabrze
"*"‘.... •
•
61 - 75
to *fora w a Gam
3
e-r-
-/
n. • Oc• 0
Z......4
Ruda SI.
.
(
• •S""
i *"''
0 50 - 60
wietechiowice
Katowice 1
After the parliamentary elections of 1997 the governing coalition formed out of the
AWS and UW, the latter convincing the AWS of the need to create the new adminis-
trative division into 12 regions and approximately 300 counties, with some 70 urban
counties, preserving in principle the number of communes. In view of the volume limi-
tations of this paper I will not report in detail the discussions and debates among the
scientists and MPs. I will simply note that the reports prepared for the Government
presented three versions of the territorial division, namely:
(1) the retrospective, with 25 voivodships,
(2) the conservative, with 17 voivodships,
(3) the prospective, with 12 voivodships.
Andrzej Stasiak : The New Administrative Division of Poland.
In: Spatial Research in Support of the European Integration. Pécs, Centre for Regional Studies,
1999. 31-42. p. Discussion papers . Special
36
ANDRZEJ STASIAK
Figure 2
Cities with over 50 000 inhabitants, 1995
$0.19450
0 Ell,
4.4
"1 olegir
Number 1
0-
C'
,1,/
0: User* \
of inhabitants
'/
t3tal owaiyolg
thousands)
Tx brr oe •
over 1000
K
501 - 1000
66
i)
• 201 - 500
•
wATZ-abf, ttivirairzok
101 - 200
00/
T..p.mottoimir ,chp".0
-71
x
•
76 - 100
Noe/A0
o
61 -
75
+. *
2.41 Wpskssa tiir
.
I
Sosnowttc
o
50 -
60
Finally, due to a strange kind of agreement and a compromise between the AWS,
UW and SLD, the Parliament passed the Act of July 24, 1998, on the introduction of
the principle of three-tier territorial division of the state. This law stipulated the estab-
lishment of 16 voivodships as of January 1, 19996. (Figure 3)
According to the new law, the units of the essential three-tier territorial division of
the state are constituted by gmina (communes), powiat (counties) and voivodships
(provinces). Article 7 of the Act binds the Diet, the Senate and the Council of
Ministers to accomplish an assessment of the new essential territorial division of the
state by December 31, 2000. An amendment of the essential territorial division of the
state can be made on the basis of results of this assessment.
Andrzej Stasiak : The New Administrative Division of Poland.
In: Spatial Research in Support of the European Integration. Pécs, Centre for Regional Studies,
1999. 31-42. p. Discussion papers . Special
THE NEW ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION OF POLAND
37
Figure 3
The average density of population in the new voivodships, 1998
(The average for Poland is 124 persons/km 2)
ti.t°
o t
wlivetilmmossaMC
s lumonemott
44111.
EEE NOM MMMMMM
MMMMM
MMMMM
10,
Density of population
(persons/km 2)
The law of July 24, 1998 had been preceded by the laws on voivodship self-govern-
ment; of June 5, 1998, on governmental administration in the voivodships, and on
powiat self-government, both also of June 5, 1998 7. On the basis of this latter law on
powiat self-government, the Council of Ministers passed a by-law concerning the estab-
lishment of powiat on August 7, 19988.
On January 1, 1999, 308 counties (powiat) were established (paradoxically, Warsaw
is also a landed county), along with 65 towns as urban counties. In line with the law on
powiat self-government of June 5, 1998, the urban counties are the towns of more than
100,000 inhabitants and towns which ceased to be voivodship capitals on December 31,
1998. However, if in the latter case the City Council of a given town did not want it to
become a separate urban county, the Council of Ministers could make an exception
(there are two such cases: the town of Sieradz in the present Lod2 voivodship, and Pila
in the Wielkopolska voivodship).
Andrzej Stasiak : The New Administrative Division of Poland.
In: Spatial Research in Support of the European Integration. Pécs, Centre for Regional Studies,
1999. 31-42. p. Discussion papers . Special
38
ANDRZEJ STASIAK
Thus the argument about the administrative division of Poland is now over. On the
other hand, with the local elections in the autumn of 1998, and the start of functioning
of the new units, a new era of public activity has began. Namely, on the much lower
levels of the administrative division, i.e. in all gmina and powiat virtually all of the pub-
lic administration was given over to the elected, local self-governmental authority. The
representative of the governmental administration — the voivod — is in fact only respon-
sible for the legal supervision. Thus at the level of voivodships the authority is split
between:
(1) the territorial governmental administration, represented by the voivod
(the province governor) and his office; the voivod is nominated and
removed by the Prime Minister and so the subordination to the central
administration is preserved, this administration having the influence
ensured on the shaping of regional policy in accordance with the con-
cepts of the state and the legal regulation in force;
(2) the self governmental
-
administration, established by the body elected
through voting, i.e. the self-governmental diet. The diet nominates the
voivodship board as the executive power, and this board is presided over
by the voivodship marshal. In accordance with Article 11 of the Act on
Voivodship Self-government of June 5, 1998, the provincial self-govern-
ment will define the strategy and the policy of voivodship development.
The strategy of province development is being implemented through
provincial programmes.
There are, naturally, a number of more detailed tasks, but all of them are in fact
contained in the above three goals and task categories. Hence, the voivodship self-gov-
ernment was really granted very broad competence, and the role of the voivod as the
representative of the central authority, as well as the role of the self-governmental
executive body, presided by the marshal, will have to take the ultimate shape in the
course of practice. This is an extremely important issue, since elaboration of the strate-
gy of development of a voivodship has on the one hand to account for the needs of a
given area and be related to exercise of pressure on the central authorities but on the
other hand it must involve an effort of adjustment to the concept of development of
the state as a whole. It is highly probable that numerous areas of conflict will arise
here, which will most likely have to be resolved within the Parliament (the Diet and the
Senate of the Republic of Poland).
SOME CHARACTERISTICS OF THE NEW VOIVODSHIPS
As already mentioned, the new territorial administrative division of Poland, in force
since January 1, 1999, is composed of 16 voivodships, 308 landed powiat and 65 urban
powiat9. We will only quote the fundamental information and data concerning the
provinces. The respective division is illustrated by Figure 3. Table 1 lists the names of
voivodships, their areas, populations, population densities and capitals. In accordance
Andrzej Stasiak : The New Administrative Division of Poland.
In: Spatial Research in Support of the European Integration. Pécs, Centre for Regional Studies,
1999. 31-42. p. Discussion papers . Special
THE NEW ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION OF POLAND
39
Table 1
Basic information on the new voivodships, 1998
No.
Name of province
Area
Population
Population
Name and population
(km2)
(thousands)
density
number of provincial capital
(persons/km-t )
(thousands)
1.
Dolnalaskie
19 946
2 984
150
Wroclaw
— 639
2.
Kujawsko - Pomorskie
17 970
2 098
117
Bydgoszcz — 386
3.
Lubelskie
25 113
2 242
89
Lublin
— 356
4.
Lubuskie
13 984
1 020
73
Gorzow
— 126
5.
Ledzkie
18 219
2 673
147
Lod2
— 812
6.
Malopolskie
15 144
3 207
212
Cracow
— 741
7.
Mazowieckie
35 597
5 065
142
Warsaw
— 1 625
8.
Opolskie
9 412
1 092
116
Opole
— 130
9.
Podkarpacide
17 926
2 117
118
Rzeszow
— 161
10.
Podlaskie
20 180
1 224
61
Bialystok
— 283
11.
Pomorskie
18 293
2 179
119
Gdansk
— 461
12.
§Iaskie
12 294
4 894
398
Katowice
— 349
13.
gwietokrzyside
11 672
1 328
114
Kielce
— 213
14.
Warmilisko-lViazurside
24 203
1 460
60
Olsztyn
— 170
15.
Wielkopolskie
29 826
3 345
112
Poznan
— 580
16.
Zachodnio-Pomorskie
22 902
1 730
76
Szczecin
—419
with the Act of July 24, 1998 10 voivodships are listed alphabetically. Let us try, howev-
er, to carry out a certain quantitative analysis of the set, and compare with the previous
division into the 49 voivodships.
Under the previous system of division the average area of a voivodship was 6,380
km2, and the average population, 790,000. The ratio of areas of the largest voivodship
(Olsztyn: 12,327 km 2) to the smallest one (Lodz: 1,524 km 2) was 8:1. The ratio of the
extreme population numbers in the voivodships (Katowice: 3,907,000 to Chelm:
249,000 persons) was 16:1. A similarly high differentiation existed in terms of popula-
tion density (ranging from 729 persons/km 2 in 1.6d2 province down to 49 persons/km 2
in Suwalki voivodship, i.e. 15:1.)
Currently, owing to a significant decrease in the number of voivodships this differ-
entiation flattened out. Thus the largest province, Mazovia, has an area of 35,597 km 2
(comparable to a small European country), whilst the smallest province, Opole, is only
9,412 km2. The ratio of the extremes has thus dwindled to 3.8:1. The Mazovian
province is also the largest in terms of population: 5,065,000 inhabitants, while the low-
est population figure is in the Lubusza province: 1,020,000. Here the ratio is 5:1.
There was a similar decrease in disproportion in population density. The maximum
is attained in Silesia voivodship: 398 persons/km 2, while the minimum is in Warmia-
Mazuria province with 60 persons/km 2 . These data, however, are somewhat misleading
when observed on the scale of voivodships. (Let us not forget that the average for the
whole country is 124 persons/km 2 .) An example of this situation is provided by the
largest, Mazovian province, in which the average population density is about 142 per-
Andrzej Stasiak : The New Administrative Division of Poland.
In: Spatial Research in Support of the European Integration. Pécs, Centre for Regional Studies,
1999. 31-42. p. Discussion papers . Special
40
ANDRZEJ STASIAK
Figure 4
The average density of population in the powiat' of the Mazovian
voivodship, 1998
(The average for the voivodship is 142 persons/km 2)
Density of population
(persons/km2)
40 — 50
51 — 60
61 — 90
Ilha
91 — 124
125 — 250
544
over 1000
sons/km2, owing to the concentration of more than 2 million people in the Warsaw
agglomeration. It is only the data on the powiat and gmina scale that show the true dif-
ferentiation in the distribution of population. Thus in this particular province, out of
38 powiat there are as many as 24 with population density below 90 person/km2, and in
12 of them this density is below 60 persons/km 2. (Figure 4) These data show the degree
of difficulty in presenting a uniform regional policy in, for instance, this voivodship.
It is also interesting to examine the differentiation of the magnitudes of provincial
capitals. From the formal point of view the biggest is the capital of the Mazovian
province, being simultaneously the capital of Poland, Warsaw, with 1,625,000 inhabi-
tants. Subsequently there is a group of four provincial capitals with populations
between 500,000 and 1 million, namely Poznan: 580,000; Wroclaw: 639,000; Cracow:
741,000 and Lodi: 812,000. There are five further provincial capitals with population
Andrzej Stasiak : The New Administrative Division of Poland.
In: Spatial Research in Support of the European Integration. Pécs, Centre for Regional Studies,
1999. 31-42. p. Discussion papers . Special
THE NEW ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION OF POLAND
41
numbers between 300-500,000. This group is composed of Katowice: 349,000; Lublin:
356,000; Bydgoszcz: 386,000; Szczecin: 419,000 and Gdansk: 461,000 inhabitants. (One
should add that Katowice constitutes the centre of the Upper Silesian agglomeration,
with a population of more than 2 million, while Gdansk is the centre of the so-called
Tri-City: Gdansk-Gdynia-Sopot. This latter agglomeration is inhabited by approxi-
mately 800-900,000 people.)
The two subsequent groups of voivodship capitals contain relatively smaller towns.
Thus there are two towns between 200-300,000 inhabitants (Kielce: 213,000 and
Bialystok: 283,000), and four provincial capitals of 100-200,000 inhabitants (GorzOw:
126,000; Opole: 130,000; Rzeszow: 161,000; Olsztyn: 170,000). Thus 6 out of 16 voivod-
ship capitals are inhabited by 100-300,000 persons.
The concept of the policy of spatial development of the country 'Poland 2000+'
assumed that Warsaw would constitute a true metropolitan area, comparable on a
European scale with Vienna, Prague and Budapest; while seven towns, now the capi-
tals of the new voivodships, namely Szczecin, Wroclaw, Katowice, Cracow, Loa,
Lublin and Gdansk should become the "Europoles", the urban centres of European
significancell. In this manner a clear underdevelopment of the so-called Eastern Wall
of Poland, the area stretching along the border with Russia, Lithuania, Belarus and
Ukraine, became visible, insofar as only one potential "Europole" — Lublin — is envis-
aged within this area. This is not justified, and I have expressed this opinion in numer-
ous discussions, since from the point of view of the strategy of the country's
development at least one more such centre should be located within the "Eastern
Wall", namely Bialystok, now also a voivodship capital.
NOTES
STASIAK, A. (ed.), (1984) Podzial administracyjny kraju. Projekty, opinie, studia, materialy, dyskusja (The
administrative division of the country. Designs, opinions, studies, discussion), Biuletyn IGiPZ PAN, 126,
128, (Warsaw)
2
POTRYKOWSKI, M. — STASIAK, A. (1996) Analiza glownych wgziow osadniczych Polski...' (Analysis
of the primary settlement nodes of Poland...), Biuletyn KPZK PAN, 173, (Warsaw)
3
Wariantowe koncepcje podzialu tetytorialnego kraju na wojewodztwa. Wersja I (Alternative concepts of the
territoral division of the country into voivodships. Version I), Pelnomocnik Warsaw, Rzadu dls reformy
administracji, 1993 (The main executor was prof. Elzbieta Wysocka and her team)
4
Maty Rocznik Statystyczny 1939 (Small Statistical Yearbook 1939), (Warsaw, GUS)
5
STASIAK, A. (1997) `Przestrzenne aspekty podzialu administracyjnego kraju' (Spatial aspects of the
administrative division of the country), In: Opinie i materialy ekspertOw dotyczace administracyjnego (tety-
torialnego) podzialu kraju, Warsaw, 1997 (The expert team of the Speaker of the Polish Senate, Adam
Struzik)
Dziennik Ustaw (The Law Journal), 96/1998
7
Dziennik Ustaw (The Law Journal), 91/1998
8
Dziennik Ustaw (The Law Journal), 103/1998
Andrzej Stasiak : The New Administrative Division of Poland.
In: Spatial Research in Support of the European Integration. Pécs, Centre for Regional Studies,
1999. 31-42. p. Discussion papers . Special
42
ANDRZEJ STASIAK
9
Ustrdj samorzcidu tetytorialnego i administracyjnego po reformie (The system of the territorial and admin-
istrative self-government after the reform), Warsaw, 1998 (Introduction by prof. Z. Niewiadomski)
10
Dziennik Ustaw (The Law Journal), 96/1998
11
Polska 2000+. Koncepcja polityki przestrzennego zagospodarowania kraju (Poland 2000+. The concept of
the policy of spatial development of the country), (Warsaw, Rzadowe Centrum Studiow Strategicznych,
August 1997)