A fair analysis of the disparities between the political agenda, the media agenda and the public agenda show that truths and explicit actions and attitudes have to be said to come out of the vicious circle.

"After reading the results and assessing the underlying data we found that in Romania there is an enormous gap between the public discourse or the public tribunal of indictment / claiming and the concrete need of society", reacted Victor Alistar - director of Transparency International Romania .

From the data depth analysis and primary correlations, it is noted that in the case of representative data for Romania, there are several issues that should trigger a vigorous action at the society level:

• Youth in general calls for a social organization in the public and business environment that no longer makes access to services and / or careers conditional upon the existence of relational mechanisms;
• The capacity of public institutions and companies to generate a real integrity environment is not efficient and, despite the anti-corruption efforts of law enforcement agencies in Romania, 1/3 of users have to pay bribes for access to their services;
• Companies in Romania, including utilities, have not improved their internal integrity climate and the public interface;
• Public administration has failed to transform its conduct and ways of interacting with citizens and, although there are fears of decision-making, the same practices for facilitating public services;
• The low response rate to the opportunity and effectiveness of corruption reporting shows, on the one hand, that protected networks can act without the law enforcement response coming promptly, and on the other hand, that at the prevention level the internal remedies do not work Neither in the administration nor in the companies providing services to the public;
• Also, the fact that (in Romania more than in other countries) victims are intimidated not to report or to protest against corruption shows that the sanctioning mechanism has logistical limitations or unitary practice.

In view of these findings, it is necessary for the specific Romanian framework to act as the main factors of responsibility and social progress:

• Government: to impose participative evaluative mechanisms for increasing public integrity in central and local public administration institutions (through standardization, training and open data);
• • The business environment (especially public service enterprises) must go beyond the formal compliance environment consisting of declarations of values and standards, and internalize these standards and value declarations at the level of operations;
• The Public Associative Environment (FALR) and the private (Patronate, Business Associations, Chambers of Commerce, etc.) must go to promoting integrity among members, including integrity certifications, and an active ethics and integrity management with evaluable results;
• Romanian civil society needs to move from exemplary approach to a much more balanced and non-partisan approach to attracting broad public support to anti-corruption. Legitimacy and credibility are the capital that NGOs have to prove for their social anticorruption entrepreneurship;

In the global economic and security context, it is absolutely necessary for the Romanian society to define its priorities resulting from the social contract and to strengthen its competitiveness capacity. Public and business integrity and the social actors' satisfaction with the current system of organization and decision-making are key to the joint responsiveness of society, the economy and the state to the challenges of the day.