Region-building in Hungary – the case of South-Transdanubia Ilona Pálné Kovács Centre for Regional Studies, HAS [email protected].

Region-building in Region-building in HungaryHungary – the case of – the case of

South-TransdanubiaSouth-Transdanubia

Ilona Pálné KovácsIlona Pálné Kovács

Centre for Regional Studies, Centre for Regional Studies, HASHAS

[email protected]@rkk.hu

The structure of the paperThe structure of the paper

► The process of region-buildingThe process of region-building► Regional institutions-setting in South-Regional institutions-setting in South-

TransdanubiaTransdanubia► The agenda of Hungarian regionalismThe agenda of Hungarian regionalism► ConclusionsConclusions

Historical backgroundHistorical background

► 10001000-- year yearss tradition of tradition of centralisationcentralisation,, dominance of dominance of external patternsexternal patterns

► 1990 systemic change:1990 systemic change: Dominance of political valuesDominance of political values European requirements European requirements

New territorial power New territorial power structure structure

► Fragmented municipalities (1600 Fragmented municipalities (1600 →3200 units)→3200 units)

► Weak county self-governments Weak county self-governments (19+Capital(19+Capital city city))

► State sector at county and regional State sector at county and regional level (40 types of deconcentrated level (40 types of deconcentrated organs)organs)

Regional policy without Regional policy without regionregionss

► 1996 Act on1996 Act on regional policy regional policy –– chance of correctionchance of correction

Three territorial levels instead of strong NUTS 2 Three territorial levels instead of strong NUTS 2 regionsregions

Decentralised institutions contra centralised Decentralised institutions contra centralised redistributionredistribution

The key organisations of regional development in HungaryThe key organisations of regional development in Hungary

Starting the region-buildingStarting the region-building

► 1998 – decision about NUTS 2 regions1998 – decision about NUTS 2 regions► 1999 – amendment of the composition 1999 – amendment of the composition

of regional development councilsof regional development councils► 2002 – government programme of 2002 – government programme of

elected regional self-governmentselected regional self-governments ((postponed)postponed)

► 2004 − amendment again (stronger 2004 − amendment again (stronger agencies, more limits)agencies, more limits)

After theAfter the accessionaccession

► Changing behaviour of the EU (2004 – Changing behaviour of the EU (2004 – centralised management of Structural centralised management of Structural Funds)Funds)

► Preparing the Second National Preparing the Second National Development Plan (how many ROPs, Development Plan (how many ROPs, how managed?)how managed?)

South-Transdanubia on the mapSouth-Transdanubia on the map

Micro-regions, counties in South Transdanubia region

Shaping the region in South Shaping the region in South TransdanubiaTransdanubia I. I.

1992 first bottom1992 first bottom--up regional up regional cooperationcooperation

► 1996 institutionalised regional policy1996 institutionalised regional policy First regional councilFirst regional council yet voluntarily yet voluntarily

(covering 4 counties)(covering 4 counties)

Partnership in the composition of the Partnership in the composition of the councilcouncil

EstablishEstablishmentment of the development agency of the development agency

Shaping the region in South Shaping the region in South TransdanubiaTransdanubia II. II.

► 19991999 −− compulsory council (covering 3 compulsory council (covering 3 counties)counties)

► Amendment of the „partnership” Amendment of the „partnership” (chambers, employees excluded, less (chambers, employees excluded, less actors from the bottomactors from the bottom,, more actors from more actors from the top)the top)

► Dependence of theDependence of the agency on the councilagency on the council► Fragmentation of the agency-organisationFragmentation of the agency-organisation

The regional development The regional development agencyagency

NonNon--profit companyprofit company Unstable financing (commissioned by Unstable financing (commissioned by

central organs, expertise, grants etc)central organs, expertise, grants etc) Increasing tasks (preparation of Increasing tasks (preparation of

council meetings, allocation of council meetings, allocation of subsidies, own projects, intermediary subsidies, own projects, intermediary body of ROP)body of ROP)

Increasing independenceIncreasing independence

Recent events, setting the Recent events, setting the agendaagenda

► 2005 2005 −− pilot programme in South- pilot programme in South- Transdanubia Transdanubia

► 20062006 − „new” government, „old”− „new” government, „old” programmesprogrammes→→ regional self- regional self-governments (rejected by the governments (rejected by the Parliament)Parliament)

► Regionalised state (?)Regionalised state (?)► Nationalised (Europeanised) regional Nationalised (Europeanised) regional

development?development?

ConclusionsConclusions

► External challenges alone are not External challenges alone are not enoughenough

► Decentralisation is not identical with Decentralisation is not identical with region-buildingregion-building

► Regional policy does not need self-Regional policy does not need self-governments (rather professional, governments (rather professional, decentralised management under the decentralised management under the control of partnership organisations)control of partnership organisations)

► Top-down or bottom-up region-Top-down or bottom-up region-building are completely differentbuilding are completely different