Have you ever seen a world map made in Australia? At first glance, not knowing what seems strange. Then, after a long look, we realize that Africa is in the middle on our usual left-hand maps, while Europe, apparently completely neglected, is in the upper left corner. In contrast, Australia and Oceania are scandalously at the center of the map for our visual conventions. We would have a similar sensory disappointment, but an inspiring experience, if we moved a little from our usual perspective on Hungarian development policy. For the past 100 years, we used to be based in Budapest. At Trianon, Hungary lost the middle link between the city and the capital as it was possible to build areas that could compensate for the dominance of the capital.
We also used to say that today Hungary is practically Budapest and its surroundings, since the distances within the country are not very large either, moreover, we do not actually have a large city outside Budapest by European standards. At the same time, we see the government’s highly commendable efforts to develop a regional regulator player from Debrecen, the second largest city, in the eastern part of the country.
Our regional development policy is also a reflection of this vision: our experts and decision-makers look at Budapest from other regions and cities of Hungary, or even if they do not live in the capital geographically, they still mark it as a starting point for determining the starting point. Accordingly, Hungarian regional development policy is traditionally defined by two aspects of catch-up.
One is the catch-up in the cities with Budapest, and the other is the so-called regional equality, that is, the elimination or at least the reduction of development differences between different regions.
If we look at the regional dimension of the Hungarian development policy on the basis of these basic objectives, we can see a mixed picture in euphemisms. There is no doubt, nor anyone arguing, that Hungary has undergone tremendous development in recent decades.
We are consistently among the most efficient in using EU aid, and in recent years the national budget has once again managed to emerge as an effective source of development financing.
Our regional programs – whether I think of the Hungarian Village Program or the Modern Cities Program or the Regional Operational Program – have brought about tangible changes in terms of villages, county capitals, and county development.
At the same time, we must not forget that the regional goals of development policy have not been achieved. While the Hungarian regions are to some extent involved in the process of catching up with the EU average, the improvement of attitudes is not significant, and the differences within the country at least are not decreasing, but rather increasing from time to time and in places.
Thus, the central development policy failed to address regional disparities. This is a somewhat polar observation, even if we are only thinking of a national context, but the reality is much clearer if we change our perspective on regions, similar to the maps produced in Australia.
Northern Transdanubia – which includes the planning and statistics regions of Western Transdanubia and Central Transdanubia – may seem like a developed region of Budapest or other regions of the country, which in fact does not have to deal with any development problems. However, we immediately get a different picture of this area and the challenges it faces if we look at the environment in which it should stand.
This is because Northern Transdanubia does not have to compete with Southern Transdanubia, which according to Eurostat data could account for 50% of the EU’s average per capita GDP in 2019, or with the Great Northern Plains, which could account for 47%. Among the regions bordering northern Transdanubia, Budapest accounts for 151 percent of the EU average, Burgenland 89 percent, and Bratislava 162 percent. Let us add that among the two statistical regions that make up the large region, Central Transdanubia accounts for 67 percent and Western Transdanubia for 71 percent.
For Northern Transdanubia, regional equality is a bad word. At the national level, this means that all resources go to areas with low rates of development. While it would be difficult to question the fairness of a password, it would be useful to discuss its usefulness. For Northern Transdanubia, parity with the less fortunate regions is not the answer. Moreover, I am convinced that it would be more beneficial for the whole country if Northern Transdanubia did not become more equal with the rest of the country, but could compete with its real competitors, the neighboring regions of the Carpathian Basin, and receive assistance from Hungary. development policy. Unlike other regions in Hungary, it’s not about catching up, but about being competitive. If you can keep up with your regional rivals, Northern Transdanubia will not be a burden but a locomotive for Hungarian development policy.
However, in order to achieve this, it is essential that decisions are made in the future on the basis of the needs of the Hungarian regions on the basis of the specific development needs. While catching up with the EU – and the national average – for most regions of Hungary is the most important goal to support, maintain and develop the competitiveness of Northern Transdanubia. This objective requires financing and other bidding tools. We need to break with the Budapest-centric nature of Hungary’s regional development policy. We need to open a chapter on regional development policy that is sensitive and intelligent to different regional specifics. We need to make room for areas under the sun!
The 2021 rural conference to be organized by Századvég Konjunktúrakutató Zrt will provide another opportunity to explain and discuss the topic in more detail. The conference, to be held on November 4, focuses on learning about, presenting and presenting the Hungarian countryside. for conference to sign up It can be on this link.
asزر Tibor Navraxx, Government Commissioner in charge of the complex development of the Economic Development Zone in Northwest Hungary, Government Commissioner in charge of Veszprém-Balaton 2023 Capital of Culture.
