Discussion Papers 2000. No. 32. 
The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System
CENTRE FOR REGIONAL STUDIES 
OF HUNGARIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES 
 
DISCUSSION PAPERS 
 
 
No. 32 
The Features of the Transition of  
Hungary’s Regional System 
by 
János RECHNITZER 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Series editor 
Zoltán GÁL 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Pécs 
2000 

Discussion Papers 2000. No. 32. 
The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System
 
Publishing of this paper is supported by the 
Research Fund of the Centre for Regional Studies, Hungary 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ISSN 0238–2008 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2000 by Centre for Regional Studies of the Hungarian Acady of Sciences 
Technical editor: Ilona Csapó, Zoltán Gál  
Typeset by Centre for Regional Studies of HAS Printed in Hungary by Sümegi 
Nyomdaipari, Kereskedelmi és Szolgáltató Ltd., Pécs 
 

Discussion Papers 2000. No. 32. 
The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System
Contents 
 
 
Introduction  / 7 
1   The regional characteristics of the transition  / 8 
1.1  Participants  / 11 
1.2  Regional resources  / 31 
1.2.1 Border regions  / 32 
1.2.2 Location factors  / 47 
1.3  Regional policy  / 52 
2  The changes of spatial structure, the spaces of the transition  / 60 
3  Regional dilemmas after the transition  / 65 
3.1  Regional differences  / 65 
3.2  The place and role of Budapest in Central-Europe  / 65 
3.3  Co-operation in the border regions  / 66 
3.4  The local governmental system and the civic sphere  / 67 
3.5  Regionalisation  / 68 
3.6  Environmental thinking  / 71 
3.7  Preparation for the EU Membership  / 71 
Bibliography  / 73 
 

Discussion Papers 2000. No. 32. 
The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System
LIST OF TABLES 
Table  1:  The regional economy and its forming factors in different economical 
systems  / 9 
Table  2:  The number of economic organisations founded between 1988 and 
1997  / 12 
Table  3:  Some characteristic indexes and their changes of regional differences 
(between 1994 and 1998)  / 19 
Table  4:  The changes of income positions in the early 90s  / 29 
Table  5:  The weight of the border regions within Hungary  / 34 
Table  6:  Some economic indicators of the Hungarian border regions  / 40 
Table  7:  The economic performance of the border regions  / 41 
Table  8:  The regional development subsidies compared to the GDP  / 56 
Table  9:  Some characteristic data of the planning-statistical region 1998 
(National average 100%)  / 69 
 
 
 
LIST OF FIGURES 
Figure  1: Spatial expansion of the foreign direct investment (1991, 1998)  / 13 
Figure  2: Regional character of Bank density  / 16 
Figure  3: Unemployment-rate (1992, 199)  / 17 
Figure  4: The forming of the regional GDP (between 1994–1997)  / 21 
Figure  5: The regional structure of the non-profit character and its connection to 
the economical potential (1997)  / 24 
Figure  6: Demographical characters and the migration of the population between 
1990–1996  / 27 
Figure  7: The base of personal income tax per capita (1990, 1998)  /28 
Figure  8: Border subregions in Hungary (1996)  / 33 
Figure  9: Tipical relation possibilities between the ex-COMECON countries  / 35 
Figure 10: Euro-regions with Hungarian participation  / 43 
Figure 11: Settlement factors in the counties I. (1997)  / 49 
Figure 12: Settlement factors in the counties II. (1997)  / 50 
Figure 13: Regional Development Organisation  / 54 
Figure 14: The regional and economical development and their connection with the 
regional GDP  / 58 
Figure 15: The spatial structure and its changing (1991, 1995)  / 61 
Figure 16: The counties and the planning-statistical regions in Hungary  / 70 
 




Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
Introduction 
The transition process of the Hungarian economy and society began exactly ten years ago, and every 
part of these systems underwent fundamental change. The country’s regional structure and the spatial 
economic societal movements followed the transition too, and precisely reflected the step by step 
altering of the socialist political-economic system and the fast development of the new system. The 
effects were very spectacular, on both regional and local levels. Workplaces disappeared in large 
numbers in crisis regions, due to the collapse of some sectors. Regions and settlements found 
themselves in a crisis. The former normal contacts (e.g.: commuting directions, attraction regions) got 
rearranged from one day to the next. The people, the households, the participants of the economy and 
the political-societal actors had to deal with the difficulties of the modernisation in their residential 
areas, local commuoities and regions. Therefore knowledge and experience can always be attached to 
a well-defined regional unit, which represents both the individuality and the legitimacy of the 
transition. The same applies to the reaction of the rearrangement. Since not only individuals, but even 
the areas acted differently, to strengthen the positive impacts or weaken the negative impacts of the 
transition. 
In this study we outline the regional characteristics of the economic and societal transition in 
Hungary, and the restructuring of the spatial system. We will try to sum up the characteristics of this 
radical and profound economic and societal transition, their impact on the factors of the spatial 
structure, on the participants of the regional development, on the regional resources, and on regional 
politics represented on government level. Our target is to acquaint the foreign readers with Hungary’s 
characteristics and with the profound changes, which began ten years ago and still, continues 
successfully today. 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
1 The regional characteristics of the transition 
Before we start analysing of the regional processes, we have to define this popular expression. 
According to our definition the time interval, between the break down of the socialist planned 
economy and the fully developed market economy is considered to be a transitional economy and 
society. This societal and economic era will be finished, when all the following conditions will be 
fulfilled or predominant: 
•  The reduction of state ownership through the dynamic expansion of private ownership, partly 
through privatisation, partly with the help of foreign and internal capital and their fast expansion 
throughout the country,  
•  The establishment of the institutions of the market economy, the reinforcement and real 
functioning of all the laws and organisations, which guarantee the freedom of enterprises and 
the security of private ownership, and that values are equally accessible everywhere for all 
participants in the economy, 
•  After the break down of the former economic structure, and the establishment of a new 
economic structure, where beside modern (high-tech) industrial branches the expansion of the 
service industry is significant, while the number of employees in the agriculture sector falls 
spectacularly and then stabilises,  
•  The changes in the regional system of the economy and society stabilises, indeed the deliberate 
and organised softening of strong regional differences begins (through regional policy), in order 
to strengthen cohesion in the country, 
•  There are clear differences in society: 
  the differences in income, between different societal groups and stratums have become 
noticeable and their local separation within settlements is clear, 
  new, polarised elites are formed (economic, political, regional, and intellectual), 
•  The non-profit and NGO-s grow in number and their influence can be noticed. 
In the time of the transition, regional influences grow. Unlike the former economic and political 
system, the spatial factors do not only take on a different complexion, but they bring new, previously 
unknown effects to the surface (Rechnitzer J. 1993, Enyedi Gy. 1994, 1996). We examine the features 
of the transition in a spatial system in such a way, that we compare the most important characters in 
different economic-societal systems. With the help of highlighted differences and identities, we can 
better understand the regional features of the transition. In Table 1 we listed the participants in the 
regional processes, the dominant resources, and the creators of regional policy. We gave all of these 
factors for the state-controlled socialist economy, for the transition economy and for the modern and 
post-modern economy and tried to show the features of the transition, based on a comparative study. 
Table 1 
The regional economy and its forming factors in different economical systems 
Name 
Socialist plan-
Transition 
Modern market 
Post-modern 
economy 
economy 
economy 
market economy 
PARTICIPANTS 
State 
The controlling 
Withdrawing 
Targeted actions 
Supporting com-
and decision 
state, Role 
for decreasing 
mon (EU) actions, 
making centre. 
searching attempts  regional differ-
strengthening of 
Priority: branch 
to solve regional 
ences 
cohesion in the 
development 
crisis 
country 
Economic 
Only a few 
Enterprises, 
Medium-size and  Small and 
organisations  
centralised 
foreign capital, 
large companies 
medium-size 
privatisation, 
enterprises and 
mixed ownership 
multinational 
companies 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
Name 
Socialist plan-
Transition 
Modern market 
Post-modern 
economy 
economy 
economy 
market economy 
Local 
Don’t have 
Economic 
Significant role 
Local economy 
communities 
function, 
functions, 
taking on more 
development 
Just transmission  transmission, 
tasks 
function searching
Non profit 
Don’t function 
Function 
Taking on of state  Increasing 
organisations 
searching, lack of  tasks, 
participation, 
support and 
participation in 
partnership 
acknowledgement  decision making 
Households 
Consumer of 
Weak economic 
Acknowledged 
Regional 
unsophisticated 
power, not 
economic 
environmental 
supply 
regional developer participant 
formative 
RESOURCES 
Spatial location 
Not significant,  
Routes to the 
Separation of 
Catching up and 
Considered when  centres are 
centres and 
securing 
industry set up 
upgraded,  
peripheries 
possibilities 
The border 
situation gives a 
new approach  
Establishment 
Environmental 
Mass of labour 
Complex location  Economic milieu  
factors 
factors, mass of 
power, training 
supply 
labour power 
infrastructure 
Local and 
Not significant, no  Developing 
Agglomerate 
Synergy, endogen 
regional market 
regional features 
markets, minimal  factors, co-
development 
internal co-
operations 
operation 
REGIONAL POLICY 
Targets 
No clear 
Regional 
Catching up, clear  Principals from 
equalisation 
differences, crisis  principals, but 
the grassroots, 
principles from 
management 
mostly from 
endogen 
above 
infrastructure 
above 
development. 
development 
cohesion 
Institutions Centralised Decentralisation 
Decentralisation 
The principal of 
without tools and 
subsidiarity 
competence 
Tools 
The principals of  Rules are pliable,  Visible and 
Forming of 
distribution are 
and not clear, 
targeted, on the 
partner co-
not clear 
resources mixed 
state level 
operations, 
community level 
Regional planning  Ideological 
Lack of national 
Societal- 
International 
appearance 
program, cannot 
economic 
trends, local 
be reached the 
development, 
adjustment, wide 
affected 
national plans and  participation 
participants 
programs 
Source: Rechnitzer, J. 1998. 
According to our study the state socialist plan (command) economy is, where state (community) 
ownership is predominant, the economy and the society centrally ruled and on the state level there are 
a mass of tasks, while on a local-regional level the tasks are just carried out. Under a modern market 
economy we understand the application of Keynesian and Neokeynesian economic policy, the 
establishment and functioning of the welfare state’s institutions, the decreasing of regional differences, 
the establishment of catching up conditions (infrastructure, industry) for the less developed regions. 
We believe, the post-modern market economy is where the institutions of the welfare state are building 
down gradually, the integration processes are strengthening, decentralisation is resolute and therefore, 
the region will become a new development resource. 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
1.1 Participants 
The former “one point” economy was succeeded by the “spatial” economy. The sole economic 
directorate and management centre has determined the prices, wages, and operating costs in the state 
socialist system. Therefore market influences could succeed only later and indirectly. The regional 
differences, regarding the terms of production were not spectacular, in contrast to living; workplaces, 
life-circumstances, and therefore the spatial impacts in the function of the economy become 
insignificant factors. But the market economy is a spatial economy. Hence, on the different points in 
the space, different costs and prices are developing, and the production factors are moving between 
these different cost conditions, which causes the devaluation of some regions, while other “economic 
spaces” are activating. The market economy involves new regional participants, while the function of 
the previous one’s is restructuring.  
The role of the state is changing. In the “state socialist economy” the political centre is the sole 
decision-maker; the processes of the regional economy are formed only by the state. When the market 
economy appears, the state withdraws from the economic actions, accordingly its direct influence on 
the regional economy decreases. In the regional processes of the transition – because of the exploding 
transition of the economic system – the “removing of the ruins” has become the most important task of 
the state. Therefore the state is significantly present in the spatial economy of the transition. Its role is 
not a targeted intervention yet, it means it doesn’t form consciously the regional functioning 
conditions of the economy (e.g.: building of traffic infrastructure, domicile supply, common purchase, 
local supports and allowances) – like in the modern market economy. Its role is the decreasing of the 
regional differences and crisis management. 
During the transition in Hungary, instead of the few thousand economical organisations, several 
hundred thousand new economic units developed rapidly. (Table 2) On the one hand, they destroyed 
the local-regional monopolies; on the other hand they formed local-regional markets. Moreover a mass 
of new interests appeared and their methods of enforcement and handling grew amongst others, at 
local level (e.g.: local taxes, domicile founding, labour force demand). 
With the regional expansion of foreign working capital we can spectacularly characterise the 
features of the Hungarian spatial system (Figure 1). Examining the foreign capital stock per person, on 
the 1991 base, we can illustrate the growth of foreign investments, their spreading out and 
differentiating by regions (in our case counties). The most favourable investment place is the capital 
(Budapest). Here, the growth of foreign capital stock per person multiple exceeds the average  
 
Table 2 
The number of economic organisations founded between 1988 and 1997 
Name Economic 
units 
Enterprises activity 
Growth 
(organisations / 10000 
(%) 
inhabitants) 
 
1988 1997 1988 1997 
1997/1988 
Budapest 
8 166 
215 164 
41 
1 156 
2 843 
Pest 
2 756 
73 247 
29 
728 
2 530 
Central Hungary 
10 922 
288 411 
37 
1 006 
2 732 
Fejér 
1 773 
26 708 
42 
626 
1 492 
Komárom-Esztergom 
1 371 
20 820 
44 
671 
1 531 
Veszprém 
1 824 
24 881 
48 
661 
1 372 
Central-Transdanubia 
4 968 
72 409 
45 
650 
1 458 
Győr 
2 032 
30 831 
48 
726 
1 524 
Vas 
1 392 
15 852 
51 
588 
1 158 
Zala 
1 575 
23 178 
52 
779 
1 497 
West-Transdanubia 
4 999 
69 861 
50 
704 
1 414 
Baranya 
2 196 
29 083 
53 
719 
1 365 
Somogy 
1 979 
23 497 
58 
703 
1 208 
Tolna 
1 468 
15 323 
58 
621 
1 062 
South-Transdanubia 
5 643 
67 903 
56 
689 
1 231 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
Borsod-Abaúj-Zemplén 
3 581 
34 280 
48 
464 
970 
Heves 
1 730 
17 950 
52 
551 
1 051 
Nógrád 
1 217 
10 260 
55 
468 
856 
North-Hungary 
6 528 
62 490 
50 
487 
971 
Hajdú-Bihar 
2 474 
31 966 
45 
586 
1 302 
Jász-Nagykun-Szolnok 
3 762 
21 701 
89 
521 
582 
Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg 
1 983 
29 257 
35 
511 
1 452 
North-Great Hungarian Plain 
8 219 
82 924 
54 
540 
1 008 
Bács-Kiskun 
3 153 
35 301 
58 
657 
1 127 
Békés 
2 294 
22 470 
57 
564 
993 
Csongrád 
2 255 
32 467 
52 
769 
1 492 
South-Great Hungarian Plain 
7 702 
90 238 
56 
665 
1 193 
Total 
48 981 
734 236 
48 
724 
 
Remark: In 1988 the industrial and agricultural companies, co-operatives and stores. 
Source: Regional Statistical Year Book 1988, 1997.  
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
 
of the countryside and even its highest value until 19961. The next foreign investment region, which 
can be clearly identified, is the West-Transdanubian region (Vas, Győr-Moson-Sopron counties), the 
area along the M1 motorway, therefore the western agglomeration of Budapest and Fejér county, 
especially Székesfehérvár. The capital stock became concentrated in these regions by the end of the 
examined interval.  
The reasons are the following: 
•  Favourable transportation connections, in particular the motorway, 
•  Fast access to the centres, 
•  High labour culture, based on earlier industrial production experiences, 
•  The already existing diversified international production-sales connections, 
                                                      
1 While in Budapest the growth was 18,4 between 1991 and 1995, so far in Győr-Moson-Sopron county, which is in the 
second best position in the country, regarding investments, the active foreign capital stock rose just 8-fold. 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
•  The favourable infrastructure (telephone supply, transportation connections, utilities) pleasant 
city milieu, 
•  The high level of local support, forming and targeted operating of adjustment strategies (e.g.: 
preparedness of areas, preferring of green field investments, establishing of industrial parks, 
local tax policy). 
The regional concentration of foreign capital means at the same time, separation by functions. 
Budapest, as a capital, attracts basically tertiary activities (financial services), and such economic 
functions, which direct and control the whole Hungarian (in many cases the Central-European) 
marketplaces (company head offices, management centres), furthermore they belong to the 
organisations of the new economic sectors (business services). The (mostly western) agglomeration of 
Budapest (basically Pest county) collects commercial (shopping) centres and warehousing, logistics 
companies. Companies set up in the North-West-Transdanubian (Gyõr-Moson-Sopron, Vas, Fejér and 
latterly Komárom-Esztergom counties), for specialised industrial mass-production (Diczházi B. 1997). 
Of course, there is also foreign capital in the other regions of the country. We can find foreign interests 
also in counties Hajdú-Bihar, Heves, Csongrád and Baranya. These companies significantly influence 
some domestic sectors, but they can’t reach the above-described concentration2. 
Next to the foreign capital, the explosion of the service sector’s development is a new factor. 
Within this sector, the financial services are worthy of our closer attention, since the financial world 
represents the economy’s life blood, furthermore its settling indicates the positive judgement of any 
centre, and it shows what kind of demands can satisfy the economic base of the region. The changes in 
the regional structure between 1995 and 1997 started the concentration process of the branch banks, 
what caused also a regional restructuring (Figure 2). On the one hand in the regions east of the River 
Tisza, degree of bank supply is disadvantageous. On the other hand, in the western regions degree of 
bank supply is increasing, therefore access to financial and business services is much easier, and it has 
a positive impact on economic renewal and development. (Fejér county is a good example, where 
within 3 years three branch banks were built, in Székesfehérvár, thus indicating a positive judgement 
on the city’s economy). 
We can register basic changes in the measure and regional system of labour power during the 
transition time. In 1989 Hungary had 4,247 million employees, their number has fallen until in 1998 
there were 2,367 million. The unemployment rate increased in the first years of transition (Figure 3) 
spectacularly in those regions where: 
The traditional heavy industry sectors (metallurgy, mining) were determining, 
•  The privatisation process started late, or didn’t even start (Rechnitzer J. 1999), 
•  The domicile business was preponderant, since the loss of East-European market affected 
significantly the “one company – one municipality” kind of centres and there agglomeration, 
•  In the first line the commuters were dismissed, since in the capital and in the large economical 
centres the layoffs affected the less educated commuters, 
•  The employment in agriculture (partly in food processing industry) was characteristic, since the 
proprietor system of the agriculture has been rearranged, and because of the decreased demand 
for their goods, their production also significantly decreased. 
In the first period of the transition a regional employment system developed, which has been only 
gradually rearranged. In Budapest and in the western part of the country the unemployment rate is 
really moderate, indeed in these regions there is a lack of labour power in some crafts, while in the 
eastern, southern and north-eastern part of the country we can expect a long-term employment tension. 
In these regions the labour power surplus is mainly unskilled, it has a moderate labour culture and the 
companies, with mass employment power, didn’t settle down in these regions. Furthermore the 
employment power of the service sector is still very low. It is observable, that in the regions with a 
long term high unemployment rate the number of workplaces increases very slowly, since we can 
reveal the regional disadvantages not only in the human resources but also in many factors of the 
regional economy and society. 
 
 
                                                      
2 As a counter example we have to mention Tolna county where, the foreign capital stock per person in 1995, didn’t even 
reach the national average from 1991 (95%), or the case of Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg county, where it was just 58%. 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
The foreign and national capital is concentrated in the capital city and in the western part of the 
country and the service sector grows dynamically in these regions. The movement of the population 
didn’t start yet because of the weak housing market, thus investment conditions in the developed 
regions are changing (e.g.: the settlement and operation costs are decreasing, while at same time the 
local market is strengthening, which causes lack of labour power. All of these widen inevitable spatial 
expansion of the foreign and national capital. In this case, the first step was made by economic policy 
(e.g.: long term tax benefits, settlement assistance) and later in the mid nineties the regional policy 
received a role too (e.g.: promotion of founding industrial parks). We can detect a strong connection 
between the regional spreading of investments and the spatial expansion of motorways in the nineties. 
We can prove unambiguously, that the rate of foreign investors, increased in those regions and centres, 
which were from the capital city (centre of the Hungarian economy, management and operation) easy 
to reach (Matolcsy Gy.–Dicházi B. 1998.), while the activity of these economical centres also 
increased. The regions without favourable transport connections are not competitive (Great Hungarian 
Plain, mainly Tiszántúl, and North-East Hungary), therefore the rearrangement of their economic 
system is slower. A further character of the transition is, that the attractive effect of the capital city 
increased even in the field of human resources. For a manager, who is successful in the countryside, it 
would be a “real career” to work for a company, which is present in the whole country or even 
internationally. The move to Budapest or to its agglomeration strengthened, “manager commuting” 
became very common and this contributed to the vacating of the countryside. Therefore during the 
transition Hungary’s “one centre shape” is strengthening and reorganising. The only innovation centre 
is Budapest. We can consider this as a Central European characteristic, since we find similar examples 
in Czech Republic, Slovakia and even in Bulgaria. The modernisation of the capital city’s role was 
very fast and it remains very fast today. The transition of those regional centres will be successful, 
which are easy to reach from the capital and whose economic system is not connected to the traditional 
industrial structure. The regional differences were significant within the country and we can’t reveal 
any change in their temporal transition either (Table 3). In the examined data there is no difference 
between the regional units, representing the highest and the lowest values, indeed Budapest has 
increased its advantage a little bit. The counties keep their general economic position, since Budapest 
and the counties at the western border reach a GDP increase, which is higher than the national average, 
while the eastern part of the country keep its underfulfillment, and the income production of the 
regional economy is still on a low level (Figure 4). As a consequence of this, the regional differences 
increased in those factors, which represent 
 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
 
 
 
an economic potential. We can observe a clear separation by regional units in the measure of GDP, in 
employment differences (unemployment), in increasing service sector (employment and institution), 
and in all factors representing innovation (research and development). On the other hand in the field of 
infrastructure equipment the regional differences have decreased (telephone supply, sewage, utilities, 
waste disposal). In the latter case listed factors indicate, that because partly on the ground of market 
organised services (telephone), and partly on the base of governmental and local initiative (sewage, 
providing of waste disposal), a slow cohesion started between the regional units in Hungary. 
The establishment of the local governmental system helped on the one side for the local 
communities to find themselves, but on the other side it helped them to appear as a new economic 
player. Under the state socialist plan economy in Hungary 1200 local governments functioned. The 
first step of the “democratic state” was, that the former merged communities regained their 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
independence, they could establish again their own local government, whose number is today about 
3200. The local government, as the local unit of the state institutions has property, has regular income, 
operates its institutions, secures work places, influences the local-regional market, (e.g.: local 
acquisition, employment, income) and takes part in local economic development, with controlling of 
some conditions (e.g.: local taxes, supply oriented local economy development). In the transition, the 
local government searches for its role, hence it was not clarified unambiguously, which are state tasks 
and which are the local (community) tasks. The state – because of the rearrangement of its role – 
would like to give more and more functions to the lower level, but in the meantime no state budget 
sources were provided. Furthermore, the local governments are not able to operate their institution 
system, which remained from state-community functions, because of the moderate state sources. In 
consequence of this they have come in conflict with the inhabitants regarding the restructuring of local 
provisions. 
The characteristic of the transition is, that the regional-local communities became economic 
players, but in this period they are still busy with the organisation of their functions. The local 
economic plans and building up of action-spaces is started and it causes the gradual increase in 
influences of local regional markets. (Pálné Kovács I., Csefkó, F. 1997). 
The spaces of the local society are permanently organised. The hindrances of the local 
community’s self-organisation were eliminated, non-profit organisations were established in order to 
reach their large number of targets (foundations, societies, public associations). 
Under their activity we can find the preserving and enriching of local values, the promotion of 
different institutions and lobbying of diverse associations. The revaluation of the local society and 
communities induces economical effects, influences the development of local regional markets (e.g.: 
because of the new supply factors they attract new services). At the same time it gives the chance also 
for the application of the local management’s new techniques (e.g.: development strategies, 
municipality marketing). 
The regional system of the country is laminate divided and strongly staggered according to the 
economical potential, the non-profit organisations and their support (Figure 5). We can divide well-
separated regions, which are geographically connected.3 Gradually systems evolved (the steps of the 
civic society), where the conditions, equipment and even the judgement of the regions is reflected in 
the presence and assistance of the regions (Rechnitzer, J. 1997a). 
Budapest composes the first group. The capital was given in every aspect an elevated value, 
therefore its conditions are not similar to the other groups at all, they differ significantly from them. 
This statement is clear for everybody. Consider, that not even the values of the second group (still with 
favourable values) can be comparable with the values of Budapest (maybe only in the non-profit 
activity). It means the separation is very characteristic, insurmountable, and even the reduction is very 
difficult. The capital has a different development process, which is not comparable with the regions. In 
the countryside, we have to and can evaluate and judge, its situation in an another dimension and 
explanation territory. We can learn a lesson from the regional analysis, that regarding Hungary, we 
can’t compare the capital and the countryside. This is a good message towards building strategies, it 
means we can’t follow the “model of the capital”, however we have to take into account its outside 
determinates (innovative factors, high concentration of organisations). 
The second group consists of two counties from West-Hungary, Gyõr-Moson-Sopron and Vas. The 
donor willingness is much higher, than in the other groups, however the non profit activity and the 
donation potential doesn’t meet the previous value, but is still higher, than it is in the other groups. In 
this region the population is more responsive to the non profits, they have traditions, and the 
organisations are more active in fund-raising, which we can see in the higher rate of dona- 
                                                      
3 We examined with multiple change analysis the connection of non profit sector and regional economy. We 
characterised the regional economy with the GDP (GDP/person), with the presence of foreign capital (capital/person), with 
the enterprise activity (1000 person/legal entity associations), with the employees (rate of active employees), with the income 
situation (individual income tax/person). We characterised the non-profit sector with its activity (1000 
inhabitants/associations), with the donation willingness (the rate of the persons, who donated the 1% of personal income tax), 
and with the donation potential (the amount of the donated personal income tax/person). 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
 
tions, but perhaps simply their function and presence leads to their outstanding value.  
The third group is composed of the counties of Central-West-Hungary (transitional counties), 
where the non profit activity is higher, than it is in the previous two groups, but the economical 
potential is more moderate, therefore the donation potential and willingness is lower. These factors are 
not with an order of magnitude different from the similar factors of the following groups, but they are 
still higher and, the non-profit activity is the factor, which ties together this group, beside the indexes 
of economic potential. In the counties of this group the number of non-profit organisations is 
increasing. They are developing their connections; the population’s donation willingness is 
advantageous, and this together with a higher income situation could increase the donation potential. 
The fourth group (which is composed of the counties from Central-Hungary, around the Danube 
and Csongrád county) differs from the fifth group (Tiszántúl, North-Hungary) in non-profit activity 
and donation indexes. In the last two groups, the non-profit sector’s indexes are almost the same, 
indeed the fifth group is a little bit better than the fourth. On the other hand the economic factors 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
represent a higher value in the fourth group, therefore the regional income, foreign capital attraction, 
employment rate, enterprise activity and income per capita are more favourable here. The 
representation of the non-profit organisations and the population’s donation activity, in the centre of 
the country is still weak, but the economical potential is stronger, than it is in the Tiszántúl region, 
therefore those counties are forming an isolated group. 
We don’t have to introduce in detail the last – fifth – group. In the case of the counties mainly from 
the Tiszántúl and North-Hungary the low unfavourable economical potential causes the low level of 
the non-profit sector and the donation activity, and this is also the main reason of the regional group 
composition.  
The non-profit sector and its assistance is strongly connected to the regional economy and to the 
income of the population. The country was already divided after the transition. We can consider the 
expansion of the non-profit organisations intensive, indeed this process hasn’t even stopped yet, but its 
focuses are relocating in the country. In the regions with more favourable conditions the increase in 
the organisation’s number is gradually falling, the signs of its saturation are already recognisable. The 
promotion of the non-profit sector by the population, goes together with the more advantageous 
economic circumstances. In the regions, where the rearrangement of the economic structure is faster 
we can detect the expansion of this sector. However, in the regions with weak economic potential we 
can register a low approval, therefore the presence of this sector is still insecure.  
The households are very important factors in the regional economy, although they had only a minor 
role in the former political system, they were even then an important regional developing power (e.g.: 
house-building, expansion of second homes). The economic stability of the households has changed, 
and become upset by the rearrangement of the economic structure; jobs closed down, appearance of 
new activities, growing consumption, economic burden of the transition. These things are strongly 
connected to the transition of the given region’s and municipality’s economy, since any change of the 
local economy influences the function and the future planning of the local households.  
By analysing the connections between the households and the regional structure, first of all we 
have to examine some characteristics of the population’s mobility (Figure 6). The regional movement 
of the population between 1990–1996 basically continued the former trends, however there are some 
new phenomena. Although the population of the country is decreasing yearly by 30–35 thousand 
capita, the population’s slow movement to the capital and its agglomeration to the big cities still 
continues. We have still population giving areas with high natural increases and young age groups 
(East-Hungary), and population receiving areas with high movement profit, low natural increases 
(Central-Hungary, big cities). The ratio of emptying areas is more and more important; they coincide 
of course with the peripheral regions, where the demographic and movement processes are 
unfavourable. A new phenomenon is a moderate population decrease in some big cities, while in the 
surrounding villages, there is a clear population growth, which shows the start of late suburbanisation 
processes. It is clear, that those regions and centres were revalued, where the transition of the 
economic structure was successful and spectacular and where the quality of life reached the desired 
level.  
We can detect a basic difference in the personal income’s regional structure, which increases more 
in the time of the transition (Figure 7). By the early 1990s in the regions of the bigger industrial 
centres, the values were above or around the country average. In the middle of this decade the country 
has become more divided, there are more islands than regions with higher personal income. The 
islands have formed regions by the late 1990s. The higher incomes are concentrated in North-
Transdanubian. This structure coincides with the expansion of foreign capital, enterprises activity, 
more developed infrastructure and multiple functioned city systems. At the same time in the eastern 
part of the country the underfulfillment is constant, the counties dropped into the lower categories, 
they couldn’t follow the dynamic of the development in the country. 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
The characteristic of the transition is4, that the real value of incomes between 1987 and 1995 in all 
regions decreased (according to KSH in the country by 37%, in the capital by 30%, in the cities of the 
countryside by 38%, in the villages by 40%). Therefore in the following evaluation the expression 
“increasing” in the case of the capital and the western counties is a “euphemism” since it is basically 
only a smaller loss of the real value (Table 4). 
Table 4  
The changes of income positions in the early 90s 
Counties Per 
capita 
 Total 
income 
Taxable 
income 
 
% in country average 
 
1987  1995 change 1988  1995 change 
Improved conditions in both kinds of income 
Budapest 113.8 
125.6 
11.8 137.7 152.1  14.4 
Vas 
95.3 103.8  8.5  90.4 105.4  15.0 
Tolna 
98.4 104.0  5.6 89.6 90.3  0.7 
Zala 
98.7 100.2  1.5 87.3 97.7 10.4 
Somogy 
92.0 93.5  1.5 81.4 82.0  0.6 
Gyõr-Moson-Sopron 
100.1 100.2  0.1  97.8 106.9  9.1 
Adverse effect in both kinds of income 
Baranya 
100.3 102.1 – 
1.8 97.6 89.3 – 
8.3 
Fejér 
100.7  99.9  – 
0.8 102.3 104.2  1.9 
Csongrád 
103.1 101.7 – 
1.4 88.8 94.4  5.6 
Veszprém 102.2 
93.0 
– 
9.2 96.2 98.0  1.8 
Deteriorated position in both kinds of income 
Pest 98.1 
97.0 
– 
1.1 102.5  98.4 – 
4.1 
Borsod-Abaúj-Zemplén 89.6 88.0 – 
1.6 89.6 81.0 – 
8.6 
Bács-Kiskun 
96.9 93.3 – 
3.6 82.2 76.6 – 
5.6 
Hajdú-Bihar 91.2 
86.3 
– 4.9 
8.6 
80.4 
– 3.2 
Békés 98.4 
92.8 
– 
5.6 82.5 80.8 – 
1.7 
Jász-Nagykun-Szolnok 98.8 91.6 – 
7.2 84.2 81.4 – 
2.8 
Heves 98.0 
90.8 
– 
7.2 91.2 86.8 – 
4.4 
Strong deterioration in both kinds of income 
Nógrád 
93.4 87.6 – 
5.8 94.0 70.8 
– 
16.0 
Komárom-Esztergom 103.9 96.2 
– 7.7 
109.1 
98.0 
– 11.1 
Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg 91.5 81.2 
– 
10.3 70.4 64.3 – 
6.1 
Total 
(%) 
100.0 100.0 
 100.0 100.0 
 
Total 
(thousand 
Ft) 
66 212 
  50 156 
 
Source: Nemes Nagy J. 1998 
If we examine merely the relative level of income5 (compared with the country average), at the two 
dates, it turns out, that only in Budapest are all of the four values higher than the country average. 
Even in the case of the regions with the best positions (Gyõr-Moson-Sopron and Fejér counties), there 
is, at least one income value, which is a little bit under the average, however these values are higher 
than the countryside average. In the examined period, there were altogether eight counties, where at 
some point, one or another income index could meet the average value. On the other hand in eleven 
cases the income level was in every aspect under the average. We have to consider, if we compare the 
county differences of economic development (GDP per capita) with the differences of the population’s 
income, we can point out, that the differences of the population’s income are significantly smaller than 
the economic differences. 
Regarding the income position’s changes, we can form four bigger groups. The group, in which in 
both kinds of income the relative income level improved, is composed of the capital and five western 
counties. Beside Budapest (like most economical indexes), the improvement of Vas county is the most 
spectacular. The next group consists of those four counties, where the data is changing in diverse 
directions. While in Baranya all the incomes are on a relatively stable level, the position of net income 
                                                      
4 We use the determinations and analysis from the study of Nemes Nagy J. 1998. 
5 The total income is composed of the employment-, small enterprises-, and agricultural production incomes family 
allowances, unemployment benefits and other sources (e.g. capital revenue). 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
deteriorated. On the other hand in Fejér, Csongrád and Veszprém counties we have a reverse situation. 
In the other counties the position’s deterioration in all kinds of income was characteristic. According 
to this, we can separate Nógrád, Komárom-Esztergom and Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg counties from the 
eastern and northern counties. In these three counties the data detected a radical deterioration. 
According to the changes, we have to take it into consideration, that –although the county scales of 
the two kinds of income are very similar – the extreme values of the position changes are clear under 
the values of taxable incomes6. In the previous one Budapest increased its advantage by 11,8%, 
Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg had to deal with a 10,3% decrease. In the case of taxable incomes, the 
relative improvement and deterioration is much more spectacular: 15.0 (Vas) and -11.6 (Nógrád). 
Very typical to this duality is, that in the counties with the highest industrial deterioration (Nógrád, 
Borsod-Abaúj-Zemplén, Komárom-Esztergom and Baranya), the relatively high pensions compensate 
the low taxable incomes (this is a previous era’s heritage, as these regions were preferred). 
The income gap between the capital and the countryside clearly increased and even the countryside 
is strongly divided, although it is not the increasing of the differences that is really characteristic, but 
the regional rearrangement: first of all the rising of the western regions and the deterioration of the 
northern regions. Even these movements didn’t cause a total “inversion” in the income spatial 
structure, as the Spearman-age rank correlation shows (its value is 0.61), which was counted from the 
total values in 1987 and 1995. It strengthens more the relation, that the former high-income regions 
remained typically on the top, and the traditional deteriorated regions couldn’t improve their position – 
however there are some changes in the position of the counties. 
During the transition the majority of households couldn’t become a regional developing power, 
their aim was basically survival and stability, unfortunately rather with less than more success. The 
differences appear not only at a regional level, but they come into existence on site or in the 
municipalities and remain constantly, at the same time they cause societal tensions, reacting on the 
other elements of the local economy (e.g.: local communities, society, local-regional market). 
Furthermore, because of the income differences, new consumption demands appear, which accelerate 
the settlement’s restructuring (moving into the green areas, appearing of city functions), influences the 
forming of trade structures (e.g.: shopping centres, city centre’s rehabilitation), expanding services 
(e.g.: new personal services), basically the supply factor of the local-regional market is increasing.  
The households are the determining factors of the regional structures, the analysis of their 
behaviour is important, not only on a national economy level, but even on a regional level. The 
stability of households, the appearance and direction of future forming development projects, or the 
income level on regional-community level and balanced employment circumstances, can serve as an 
indicator, they can show the regional economy’s condition, the end of the transition and the presence 
of the developed market economy. At the working out of regional development strategies, we have to 
consider the economic transition of the households, at the same time we have to work out those 
developing elements, which will directly influence their function. 
1.2 Regional resources 
How can we determine the resources of a regional unit? All the points of an economic space are 
determined by their situation in it. On the one hand it depends on the distance from the points with 
high economic potential and on the strength of their attractions. On the other hand it depends on the 
innate strength of the point, and its attraction factors. These points and the local-regional market’s size 
and its economic organising impact can be the settlement factors from an economic stand point. The 
regional resources are strongly exposed to the whole economy’s development, to its changes, therefore 
they are being constantly revalued, and due to it the judgement of the spaces is changing and forming. 
From the regional resources the spatial situation in the transition became important, we could say basic 
factor. In consequence of the political and economic transition the country has been rearranged. The 
previously peripheral western regions adjacent to the border, suddenly became leaders of change. Thus 
they started a fast development, a stabilising connection system emerged, while at the same time they 
                                                      
6 The taxable incomes – because of the Hungarian taxation system’s characteristic – consist basically of employment 
incomes, because the entrepreneur incomes are not important in its forming. 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
became the example regions of modernisation (Rechnitzer J. 1997c.). On the counterpart the other 
regions adjacent to the border have shown a classical peripheral condition. Since partly equal 
developed regions and economies met each other, which didn’t allow significant economic (e.g.: 
foreign capital) and renewing (e.g.: new know-how, products and activity) energies to stream from one 
region to another. 
1.2.1 Border regions 
Hungary is bordered with seven countries (Austria: 356 km, Slovenia: 102 km, Croatia: 355 km, 
Yugoslavia: 164 km, Romania: 453 km, Ukraine: 137 km, Slovakia: 679 km), which also means that it 
has a relatively large number of border regions, in spite of the small size of the country. 35% of the 
territory of the country can be considered border region,2  and 28.2% of the population (approx. 2.7 
million) lives in such regions (Figure 8). A significant proportion of our settlements – 43 % – lies 
close to the border, owing partly to the fact that the majority of the tiny-village-regions are located 
within the border regions. When characterizing the border regions by the limitation of the commuter 
belt of towns we get the result that 55 of the 182 town commuter belts are located at the border regions 
which means that nearly 30 % of the Hungarian towns are located close to the border (Table 5)
The peripheral nature of the border regions (especially in the era of state socialism) was also a 
characteristic feature in Hungary. However the relative backwardness, compared to the inner areas, 
was different from border region to border region, influenced very remarkably by historic events, as 
well as the changes of the political and economic system. 
 
                                                      
7 Those town neighbourhood areas (KSH small regions) are considered border regions that adjoin the state boundary and 
are in direct contact with it (permanent, periodical or previously operating frontier stations). 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
 
 
Table 5 
The weight of the border regions within Hungary 
Regions 
Number of  Population 
Rate of 
Area 
Proportion 
commuter  (thousand) population 
(%) 
of town 
belts 
(%) 
population 
(%) 
Border 
regions 
55  2,969 28.2 32.2 
 
Austrian 
border 
region* 
7  381 3.7 3.9 56.6 
Danube border region 

348 
3.3 
2.2 
61.4 
East-Slovak border region 
11  546 5.2 6.1 45.3 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
Ukrainian border region 

172 
1.6 
2.1 
25.1 
Romanian border region 
14 
788 
7.5 
7.9 
58.9 
Yugoslavian border region 

385 
3.6 
3.8 
67.1 
Croatian 
border 
region 
8  349 3.3 6.2 38.3 
Inner 
regions 
127  7560 71.8 67.8 
 
Center (Budapest + Pest County) 
16 2840 7.8 6.1 79.9 
West 
(Transdanubia) 
46  2123 20.2 24.2 56.2 
East (Great Hungarian Plain) 
50 
1753 
16.6 
23.1 
65.1 
North 
16  844 8.2 7.4 53.3 
National 
average 
182  10.529 100.0 100.0  63.1 
*Together with the Austro-Slovenian border section  
Source: Ruttkay, É. 1995 
 
In the era of state socialism the centralised state economic control model did not make it possible in 
local or medium level to establish and maintain contacts over the border, not even with the “fraternal 
countries”, with the countries of the socialist block. There were just a few examples of establishing 
contacts on a local level, in addition to the superficial twin-city contacts of a protocol nature of some 
towns, especially county seats. The structure of such co-operations, the establishment of contacts 
happened strictly according to a pre-determined “scenario”. The towns and counties had twin-city and 
twin-county contacts rather with identical area units of the previous socialist countries,3 but border 
regions were not included among them, nor the Hungarian populated settlements and counties of the 
neighbouring countries. 
The few cross-border contacts were operating according to the following scheme (Figure 9, Tóth, 
J. 1996). The leaders of a county decided to establish cultural contacts with a county or town situated 
on the other side of the border. They submitted their desire to the central party and governmental 
bodies. If the bodies of central power considered the initiative acceptable, then they contacted the 
party and governmental management of the neighbouring country by way of diplomacy, with the idea 
of establishing contacts. If they were also of the opinion that the initiative is to be supported, then they 
approved the contact to their own county or town, after notifying the central governmental bodies of 
the neighbouring state. After the involved counties and towns have obtained the approval on both sides 
of the border, the establishment of twin-county or twin-city contacts might commence with procedures 
of high protocol. However they always depended basically on the relation of the two countries, and the 
contacts were suspended or terminated several times. 
 
                                                      
8 The name of the housing estates of the Hungarian towns is a good indicator of the contacts, since it was a political 
fashion to name the new housing estates after the twin-city or county. 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
 
 
 
In the era of state socialism the situation of the individual border regions could be characterised as 
follows: 
•  Hungarian–Austrian border: it could be considered a “dead-border” until the 1960s, since 
human contact between the populations and economic contacts did not exist in the border 
regions. The détente came in the 1970s, when tourism started gradually (within that shopping 
tourism by the end of the decade), economic contacts became more extensive, and co-operations 
between institutions also started to develop. The eighties are already characterised by a lively 
co-operation. Human contact between the populations are becoming dynamic, ever more 
economic units establishing production co-operation, and the illegal labour force flow starts. 
The wire fence separating the two countries was abolished in 1989, and by the introduction of 
the world-passport a new era starts in the history of the Austro–Hungarian border region. 
(Rechnitzer, J. 1990). 
•  Hungarian–Czechoslovak border: it has been the longest border region in Hungary, it amounted 
to 679 km. It has changed several times since 1945: because of the deportations and enforced 
translocation actions following World War II. Some 40 000 Hungarians were translocated from 
Slovakia by the Czechoslovak authorities, while over 100,000 persons have moved over to 
Hungarian territory as a consequence of the actions. The remaining Hungarian society was 
completely limited in their citizens rights; therefore no contacts existed over the border until the 
end of the fifties. After this co-operation began to start slowly. Based on its capabilities the 
border region can be divided into two sections: Danube-region and the East-Slovak border 
region. 
•  Danube region: potential transport and development zone, industrialised area. Free labour 
movement is characteristic for this section of the border (e.g.: Győr textile industries, industrial 
zone alongside the Danube), and it was fairly unique at this time. Another important element of 
the co-operation is the big investment of the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros hydroelectric station, which 
has become the political conflict between the two countries from the eighties, but also became 
one of the determining symbols of the transition in Hungary. Contacts between business units, 
especially agricultural co-operatives were regular (e.g.: assistance in harvest, because of the 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
difference in time of ripening, agricultural machinery production, mutual organised holidays), 
but shopping tourism (towns alongside the border) and tourism (Balaton, Tatry) also could be 
considered intensive in both relations. 
•  East-Slovak border zone: peripheral region of agrarian character, however heavy industry 
played predominant role in certain areas (metallurgy, engineering). It is a fact that in the past it 
fostered or even stimulated significantly the co-operation between factories. This area remained 
a potential zone for co-operation, first of all between the centres of Miskolc and Kosice. The 
other bilateral co-operations between other towns can be called substantial only regarding 
shopping tourism. 
The Hungarian-Slovak cross-border contacts were institutionalised in the era of state socialism. A 
constant working committee (Working Committee for Regional Development) was established by the 
two countries in 1971 and it prepared a medium-term development concept in 1977 for the common 
frontier (1977–1990). Some of its contents have been realised (e.g.: co-operation on water 
conservation, transport management – track renewal, co-ordination of development plans, etc.). 
However the political and environmental objections to the hydroelectric station and dam (Gabcikovo–
Nagymaros), the economic hardships and the debt crisis have prevented its execution (Hajdú, Z. 
1996). 
•  Hungarian-Soviet border: in spite of the economic, political and military alliance it could be 
considered a closed border (especially at certain periods) as the Hungaro–Austrian border. It 
was mainly due to the fact, that the Sub-Carpathian area played an outstanding strategic role, the 
concentration of military forces was high in the region. The Soviet military presence – although 
it was not aimed directly against Hungary – has naturally crippled the cross-border dialogue. It 
was hindered by a number of factors, the most important of them being the fear of the 
Hungarian agitation, since 200 thousand people belonging to the Hungarian ethnic group living 
close to the border on the Soviet side. Only one frontier station was working at this border at 
Záhony, which was both railway and road crossing point. This station was destined to serve the 
larger regional centres, and also worked as a trans-loading centre, because trans-loading from 
the railways of broad gauge to that of narrow gauge took place here. It also meant that a part of 
the shipments destined for Western Europe (predominantly Austria and West Germany) were 
also trans-loaded here. 
•  Hungarian–Romanian border: despite official propaganda (“the Romanian-Hungarian border is 
the area of friendship, it serves as an example for the socialist brothers”) various attitudes – like 
the continuous infringement of the minorities’ rights, the permanent hostilities – hindered real 
co-operation. The contacts were poor also at international level, and that also applied a limit to 
everyday contact, despite the fact that the peripheral position would have logically needed the 
co-operation. Theoretically the Hungarian language territory could be the basis for the 
foundation of cross-border co-operation, but in fact it became its main obstacle. It was more 
important for the Romanian government to alter the ethnic character of the area, than to let or 
foster the cross-border co-operation and contacts. The civil relations were also limited by very 
severe administrative measures. 
•  Hungarian–Yugoslavian border: “dead-border” in the fifties and sixties, because of significant 
political opposition all forms of contacts were suspended at that time. A détente could be seen 
from the seventies, and economic co-operations (e.g. processing agricultural crop) have become 
possible. The Hungarian cities alongside the border (Nagykanizsa, Pécs, Szeged) got an ever 
growing role in the shopping tourism, and the Yugoslavian inhabitants were appearing also in 
more and more small towns alongside the border to do shopping. Similarly the Hungarian 
shopping tourism is more and more substantial, and it also targets the towns alongside the 
Yugoslavian border. The border region is not unified in the official contacts either. While a 
lively co-operation develops between Zala county and Slovenia, the town-to-town contacts are 
more dominant on the Croatian section (Osijek–Pécs), and institutional co-operations are 
characterising the Serbian (Vojvodinan) section (the Hungarian majority populated area). 
The realised regional structure rearrangements influenced significantly the border regions, 
however, ever increasing differences have evolved between the border regions. The base reasons can 
be traced back to the centre-periphery relation, the larger and smaller spatial structural movements 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
(Ruttkay, É. 1995), as well as the differences of the economic and social character of the regions 
meeting each other on both sides of the frontiers (Rechnitzer, J. 1997). In case of the centre-periphery 
relation the big centres or the border regions in their commuter belt can adjust themselves to the 
changes more quickly (Golobics, P. 1995). The period of transition was characterised in these regions 
by a broader offer for employment, and by larger-smaller hiccups. Certain border regions have 
devalued to a large degree, in the course of the spatial structural changes (e.g. the previous Soviet, now 
Ukrainian border), where the modernisation processes were not experienced. The smaller centres were 
not able to receive the innovations, therefore the structural crisis have further deepened, and the illegal 
elements (black economy, crime, smuggling people through the border) became dominant. And finally 
those border regions became the winners of the transition, where not the periphery met the periphery, 
which means that the border separated not regions of lastingly disadvantageous position, but both 
sides could gain some kind of development energy from the other party (e.g. investments, shopping 
and service tourism, labour, delivery and processing of goods, cultural and institutional contacts, etc.). 
Now especially such regions are considered periphery that are located “on the edge” of the 
backward areas and regions of the country, so they can even be called double periphery (“periphery of 
the peripheries”). Such areas are the regions alongside the Ukrainian, the East-Slovak and partly the 
Romanian border. Some of the economic indicators of the regions alongside the borders are contained 
in  Table 6 which shows the indicators of the individual regions compared to those of the national 
average, and thereby it indicates how much they can be considered periphery. 
According to the border region’s general economic development, we can point out, that there are 
differences between the border regions, however these development differences are distinguished. The 
parameters of the Austrian border region are outstanding, the values are mainly over the average, it 
means the economic activity is higher, which is the consequence of multilateral co-operation. The 
other border regions are in a more depressed situation, perhaps in the Danube region, at this part of the 
Slovak–Hungarian border, potential industrial factors are greater, due to the character of the region’s 
economy. We can observe differences between the two Romanian-Hungarian border regions. The 
North-Eastern border region consists of more underdeveloped areas, that is why its values are far 
under the country average, while in the south-eastern border-region the situation is better, its economic 
indicators are closer to the country average. We can unambiguously detect, that the Hungarian border 
regions – except the Austrian–Hungarian and Danube border regions – are peripheral regions, they 
have moderate economical sources. 
We characterise the economic activity due to the border region’s net income, and according to this, 
regional differences described above, are just confirmed (Table 7). The Danube border region is on 
top, since in this region there is significant industrial potential and they are constantly producing, 
indeed this region gives 44.4% of the border regions’ export revenue. In the two Romanian border 
regions we can find one-one industrial centre (North-East: Debrecen, South-East: Békéscsaba-Gyula) 
and they have significant economic production, but their export potential is very weak. The 
economical production of the Slovenian border region’s is significant, indeed its export potential is 
emerging ahead of the other regions this is clearly due to the GM Opel Szentgotthárd, which is 
producing basically only for export.  
In the East-Slovak, Ukrainian, North-East-, and South-East-Romanian, Serbian, Croatian, and 
Slovenian border regions peripheral border regions met peripheral regions. In these peripheral border 
regions the connecting areas are unable to take over development resources from each other, there are 
no significant differences between the comparative factors of the economy, and the elements of the 
institu- 
tional system are not compatible. Some examples: There is ample labour on both sides, but there is no 
workplace; there are production resources (agricultural products on the Hungarian side and natural 
resources with the neighbour), but they cannot be mobilised due to the lack of capital. The bottle-neck 
in communication (transportion contacts, accessibility, number and distribution of the frontier stations, 
the bureaucratic nature of crossing the border) prevents the contacts. And finally the differing legal, 
institutional and – last but not least – economic position (unstable local currencies, high rates of 
inflation) basically curbs co-operation. 
Let’s take a look at the peculiarities of transition border regions by border region, because by this 
we can demonstrate the significant differences, and at the same time we can refer to the directions of 
interventions. 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
Austrian–Slovenian border region: can be considered the success region of the transition and also 
one of its winners. The geographical situation has been re-valued, and so the transformation of the 
economic structure happened quickly (quick privatisation, significant foreign investments). The 
continuous renewal of the former large-scale industrial pattern has been realised predominantly with 
the participation of foreign capital. In the Ford-type mass production the dominant role is played by 
wage-work, and the small and medium-sized undertakings are appearing slowly. However the 
extension of the service sector is strong, and its structure is ever more diversified. The income 
positions are beneficial, and therefore the local and regional market is lively, and it is further 
strengthened by the regular shopping tourism which is also changing in its structure. The trans-border 
contacts have been institutionalised, and the West/Nyugat Pannónia Euroregion (Figure 10) was 
established in 1998. The frames and resources of the co-operation are clear, there are still a number of 
opportunities for the joint development of the border region (Rechnitzer, J. 1997d). 
The institutional contacts in the Austro-Hungarian border region started in 1985 when the Austro-
Hungarian Regional Development and Planning Commission was founded. This was the birth of the 
border co-operation and planning, still with the leadership of the central government. In 1992 the 
Border Regional Council was established on the initiative of two Hungarian counties (Győr-Moson-
Sopron and Vas) and the Land of Burgenland and in nine sections they worked out recommendations 
for the forms of co-operations. The European Union subsidy commenced in 1995 (Phare CBC) gave a 
considerable impetus to the co-operation in the border region. (Szörényi 1999) After the expiry of the 
six-year-mandate of the Council (1998) the members established the West/Nyugat Pannónia 
Euroregion (October 1998), to which Zala county also joined in 1999. The aim of the co-operation – in 
addition to deepening the contacts – has been to foster the entry into the European Union, and the 
preparation for it. However the open organisation wishes to deal 
 
Figure 10  
 
with all questions that affect the contacts alongside the border, in numerous spheres of life. Its leading 
body is the Council of Euroregion (with 40 members). It operates a Secretariat (with 4 members), 
while preparation of the programmes takes place in working groups. It is a step forward compared to 
the previous situation that a continuously operating institution has been established, and resources are 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
to be provided for that. However, the deficiency is that predominantly the ideas of the political level 
are achieved, the circle of those affected is too big, and therefore the new institution can only slowly 
become an actually functioning multi-regional co-operation. 
Danube-region: The area that utilised the effects of the Vienna–Győr–Budapest innovation axis in 
the last third of the nineties. The demolition of one of the elements of the former basis of large-scale 
industries (mining) resulted in a long transition, while the renewal of the other group of elements 
(industrial zone alongside the Danube) had a slow start. This border region is characterised by gradual 
stabilisation and slow rearrangement, where the functions of the centres has not yet been extended, 
therefore only certain elements of the service sector can be traced. The cross-border contacts are 
strong first of all in the sphere of the population, and they are concentrated on the crossing points 
(Komárom, Esztergom), but they do not have an institutional form. It would be necessary to increase 
the number and quality of the joining points (bridge in Esztergom). In particular the settlements would 
welcome it on both sides, on a national level however – just because of the rearrangement of the 
political contacts – only a cautious move can be monitored (Rechnitzer, J. 1998). 
East-Slovak border region: the previous centres of heavy industry have reached a crisis, therefore 
this border region is characterised by significant and lasting tensions of employment. The 
transformation of the economic structure is extremely low, the capabilities of the agricultural 
production are not beneficial, the service sector did not appear in a real sense, the erosion of the 
population (ageing, the ever-increasing ratio of the Romany population) are increasing (Dankó, L.–G. 
Fekete, É.
 1996). 
A similar situation can also be noticed in the neighbouring border regions. The distinctive signs of 
a uniform large region of peripheral position, embracing several East-European countries (Poland, 
Slovakia, Hungary, Romania) can be noticed that shows identical signs in a lasting way. As a 
consequence, economic and social renewal cannot be expected from the neighbouring countries. It is a 
positive sign that the cross-border settlement-to-settlement and small region-contacts alongside the 
river Ipoly are becoming more and more intensive, and they may contribute to solving the common 
headaches. As a result, in April 1999 the mayors and more significant non-profit organisations of the 
settlements of the region including the Danube–Ipoly National Park established the Ipoly Euroregion 
Cross-border Interregional Co-operation (Figure 10). 
The Ipoly Euroregion Cross-border Interregional Co-operation that was established in April 1999 
was signed on the Hungarian side by four towns alongside the border, two settlements and seven non-
profit organisations, while on the Slovak side by an association of local-governments, four settlements 
and six non-profit organisations. The aim is to strengthen the regional contacts of the Ipoly-valley, to 
intensify economic co-operation and to harmonise the developments. That would involve 323 
settlements and 450 thousand citizens. The institutional system is composed of a governing body, 
secretariat and nine planned working committees. The Ipoly Euroregion wishes to embrace a 
geographical, economic and cultural area on both sides of the border. The initiative has come from 
below, the players are well visible, and the action circles may positively serve the development of the 
border region. There are signs indicating the establishment of the Vág–Danube–Ipoly Euroregion by 
Komárom-Esztergom County and Pest County, as well as the Nitra Region alongside the border, to 
which the Ipoly Euroregion that was established on the initiative at settlement level will later join. 
Ukrainian border region: practically the same problems are appearing as in the East-Slovak border 
region, and these phenomena characterise predominantly also the Hungarian-Ukrainian-Romanian 
border section. The region has always been considered a fringe region between Hungary and 
Transylvania, and even significant Hungarian area development subsidies were unable to change this 
position. The border regions – as a consequence of the various border changes made in the XX. 
century – are burdened with tensions in all three countries. The first East-European cross-border co-
operation, the Kárpátok Euroregion Interregional Alliance (Figure 10). that was established in 1993 
was as yet unable to dissolve these potential oppositions. A concerted multi-regional development 
would be needed (e.g. to increase the transfer capacity of the frontier stations, to open new crossing 
points). However the central and even the regional levels are unable to pay attention to and to provide 
resources for the co-operation, because of the differing administrative levels and competencies, as well 
as the basically different problems of the adjacent countries. Active movement of the population can 
be experienced in the region which strengthens first of all the shopping tourism and its establishments 
(e.g. COMECON-markets) in the big centres. Presently this is the border section that has been infected 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
with illegal activities (e.g. smuggling over cars and people, criminal gangs) the most. (Süli-Zakar, I. 
1997). 
The Kárpátok Euroregion Interregional Alliance was established in 1993 by four countries: 
Hungary, Poland, Ukraine and Romania. The multinational co-operation that embraces over 11 million 
people and 106 thousand km2 area is the first and unique in the East-European region, since a previous 
historical region organised itself together again, and therefore the connecting regions that uniformly 
can be considered peripherals of their respective countries expect the start of their development from 
the common intervention. The Euroregion has a permanently acting co-ordination organisation (Chief 
Secretariat, and a foundation supporting the co-operation), that takes care of the execution of the 
planned activities (professional exchange programs, commercial contacts, cultural, educational and 
environmental protection programs). This region may offer in the future great opportunities for 
Hungary, therefore the joint development strategy must be worked out as soon as possible – in spite of 
the significant institutional and informational differences – and national, as well as European Union 
resources must be provided for its program. 
Romanian border region: shows the characteristics of the three-border big region, and the 
peripheral position is also typical, but several big centres – on both sides – are becoming more and 
more active. In the north-eastern border region more significant activity can be monitored on the 
Romanian side, because of the large Hungarian population. It reflects itself in the more and more 
diversified economic contacts, while the settlement-to-settlement and regional contacts are becoming 
more lively, too. (Dancs, L. 1999). More big centres are located in the south-eastern border region 
(Békés, Csongrád), and they can compete with each other in the future (Szeged–Timisoara, 
Békéscsaba–Arad), but the economic contacts develop slowly (Lengyel, I. 1996). In September 1998 
the Duna–Maros–Tisza Regional Co-operation was established (Figure 10), which could co-ordinate 
the common matters of the region, however the Kosovo war applied a break in the operation of the 
organisation. A definite intention can be observed for the settlement-to-settlement and regional 
contacts, but the number and load of the border crossing stations, as well as their insufficient 
geographic distribution does not help the creation of many-sided co-operations. 
The Duna–Maros–Tisza Regional Co-operation can be considered the start of multi-regional co-
operation, which embraces the area units of three countries (Hungary, Romania, Yugoslavia) – 77 500 
km2 – and involves nearly 6 million people. The aim is the intensification of the cross-border contacts 
regarding economy, transportation, telecommunication, environmental protection, tourism, sciences, 
culture and civil organisations. It has been decided that a uniform development concept will be worked 
out and permanent secretariat, as well as common financial fund will be established. 
Yugoslavian (Serbian) border region: can be considered a continuously developing region, on the 
fringe of the Great Hungarian Plain. Szeged as a big centre and Baja as a middle-sized town have a 
strong effect on the border region, but there are a number of other small towns that could serve the 
good example of functions and renewal. The contacts are spectacular presently in the private sphere, 
i.e. in the population’s travels, but the activity of the economic organisations that were established 
during the former Yugoslavian war is also considerable. Significant experience has also accumulated 
in the operation of the “grey-economy” of the border region (Pál, Á. 1996). This border region can be 
reached perhaps in the easiest way out of the eastern border regions. If consolidation occurs in 
Yugoslavia – and the gaining of autonomy in Vojvodina – there are great chances for the 
intensification of economic and co-operation activity, with which various activities would become 
legal. 
Croatian border region: the southern periphery of Transdanubia, which meets on the other side a 
periphery practically without any centres. The geographical border (Dráva) did not have an adequate 
number of bridges. The permanent Croatian-Serbian tension (Baranya triangle) eliminated certain 
border sections of the contacts, while there is a significant and lively shopping tourism elsewhere. The 
institutional forms of the trans-border co-operation can only slowly be recognised, and the various 
initiatives do not meet the support of the other party in many instances (like the Gyurgyevác 
hydroelectric station on the Croatian side, and the Duna–Dráva National Park on the Hungarian one). 
Significant plans were born in the inter-governmental relations for the intensification of the traffic 
connections (Rijeka–Zagreb–Budapest motorway). (Hajdú, Z. 1996, Vuics, T. 1996) 
It is very typical of the Hungarian transition, that those regions were able to develop successfully, 
which were easy to reach from the economic centres of Western Europe (Austria, Bavaria). Where this 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
accessibility was not secured, there the modernisation carrier economic players didn’t settle down, 
except where they could increase their market share through privatisation.9
The new connection points to the western European regional-economical system, inevitably 
brought with it competition between the settlements and regions (Enyedi Gy. 1996). The unifying 
European space forces the Hungarian space structure to join it at more and more points. The 
accessibility of the big and multiple renewal bringing economic centres is improving, indeed with the 
appearance of players attached to and originating from there, new orientations and co-operations come 
into existence, which influence the region and settlement development. We think not only of the 
economical connections, but also of the settlement-regional co-operations (e.g.: border regions, partner 
connections, and participation in European organisations). In consequence of all of these international 
and domestic city, settlement and regional competition appeared, which through the constant 
comparing of resources forces their renewal too (Enyedi Gy. 1997). 
1.2.2 Location factors 
It is important for economic units, what kind of conditions they are offered in their location. The 
question is, whether these factors help or hinder the function and production of the economic 
organisations. The characters of location factors and types are changing, the demands of economic 
units are expanding constantly with new elements. The conditions and supply of the regions are 
growing, which causes the attraction of new enterprises and at the same time increasing competition 
for the location of economic units. 
Let’s take a look at those elements out of the location factors (Figure 11–12). which, according to 
our experience, the economic units take into consideration by the location and long term functioning. 
The factor groups can consist of a number of elements and out of them the focuses – because of the 
different production characters – can be different. Of course the selection of the enterprise-domiciles is 
a row of personal decisions, together with the evaluation of more economical and non-economical 
components. 
In the first group of factors- population activity group- we examined the changing of population 
(1990–1994), the regions population hosting and keeping ability, the measure of migration differences 
(1980–1989), and the number of retired, which shows also the working capacity. We didn’t experience 
large differences in the country. Fejér is the only county with favourable parameters, while in the other 
counties the values are moderate, it means the demographic factors are equalised, that’s why there 
influence to the location is indirect. The country’s demographic parameters are deteriorating, the 
population is decreasing yearly by 25–30 thousand on average and the reduction is continuing, causing 
a permanent depression in some regions, because the young population is migrating, and therefore the 
reproduction ability is very low.  
We connected the expenses of the labour-force with the monthly wages and the qualifications 
within the population, through the proportion with an academic degree and with the number of 
students participating in higher education. The first group is composed of Gyõr-Moson-Sopron, Vas, 
Csongrád and Heves counties. These regions offered advantageous conditions for qualified work, 
although in these centres there is no longer a significant skilled labour-force reserve. In the other 
regions these values are nearly on an equal level, except in Pest, Nógrád and Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg 
counties where these values are lower, which is the consequence of the low number of education 
places. The regional differences of the labour-force expenses are not significant yet, only in the 
capital-countryside relation are there measurable differences. Due to the education, labour culture, 
experience (these are not measured or hard to measure location factors) we can detect spatial 
variances, and their reproduction during the transition still continues.  
We examined five elements out of the transportation and communication factors: the rate of “first 
class” ways, the car and telephone density and the accessibility of Budapest and Vienna. Basically 
those regions, adjacent to the motorway are the ones that can offer appropriate transportation and 
communication conditions. This explains partly the location selection of the foreign capital and it 
shows also the significant influence of transportation and communication. 
                                                      
9 The regional structure of the foreign green field investments demonstrate very well this statement (Dicházi B. 1997). 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
We characterised the infrastructure level with a density of homes, the number of homes connected 
to the sewage system; electricity consumption and the number of homes with waste collection. The 
regional separation of the country is clear again, maybe the “banana” at the Danube region can provide 
a higher level factor and it can in the future be its attraction. 
The indexes of social infrastructure. According to the number of doctors, hospitals and teachers in 
the primary schools, some counties are merging (Baranya, Csongrád), while the West-Transdanubia 
shows the picture of a unified well provided region, we find on the other parts of the country again 
differences and disparity.  
The local business assistance, characterised by the numbers of duty free zones, the ratio of the 
settlements with industrial taxes and the amount of support from business assistance centres and state 
funds, is very diverse again. There are more active regions, where besides the regional economy the 
local governments also take their share of developing the economy. In the majority of counties – in 
consequence of some other factors – we can not detect a clear and conscious developing of the 
regional-local economy. 
We characterised the local economy’s activity with the trade turnover, the households gross 
expenses, the prices of accommodation (country capitals), the measure of personal income tax, the 
number of homes built and out of the local governmental expenses with the accumulated and capital 
sources. According to this factor group North-West-Transdanubia shows a higher than average value. 
The other part of the country is still divided; we can experience a more active local economy 
environment maybe in the case of regional centres, regions with more important tourism and counties 
with strengthening border connections. 
In the last group, we evaluated some indexes of the quality of life: the quality of environment with 
the protected natural areas, the cultural supply with the numbers of theatre and exhibition visitors, the 
public security with the number of crimes and the local society with the number of foundations and 
civil organisations and with the donation activity of the adult population. In the North-West-
Transdanubia the life circumstances are above the country average, the cultural milieu is rich, the 
organisation of the local society is vivid, the civic traditions remain which create attractive conditions 
for economic possibilities to make the most of them. In the Transdanubia regions the situation is still 
better, than on the other part of the country. The quality of life, as an indirect influence factor to 
location, are unequal in the country. 
Of the local resources finally we have to mention the local-regional market, since we couldn’t 
speak about it in the state socialist economy, in a one point economy, but in the spatial economy or 
market economy it is a determining factor. During the transition the local-regional market developed 
only slowly. Its development is dependant on the strength of the local economy, on the character of the 
consumption and also on some unique temporal or constant circumstances (e.g.: adjacent situation to 
the border). A further characteristic of the transition is the strong development of the service sector 
initially in the big cities and the accessibility of different goods even on the lower community level. 
The competition is still weak and we can detect consumer defencelessness. The organisation of local 
markets in the case of services is made by big centres mainly with headquarters in Budapest. The 
number of enterprises producing for the local or regional market is still low. Similarly moderate is the 
co-operation between producers and the players in the service sector. In developing regional strategies 
we have to decrease this character, since these are dominant factors of an endogen development.  
1.3 Regional policy 
In Hungary regional policy is not a product of a transition. After the Second World War the forming of 
the regional processes was started by the state. These actions reflected the economical and political 
characters of the given time. The first systematic regional development conception of state socialism 
was introduced in 1971. The goal of the National Settlement Network Development Plan (OTK) was 
securing an equalised development. This conception promoted the development of a rigid settlement 
system, where the functions of the communities were connected to a strong hierarchy and the state 
wanted to direct them. In the internal political struggles in the 1970s centralisation became the winner, 
that is why the lower level of the community systems lost their functions and didn’t receive any 
subsidy. In the 1980s the regional differences had been sharpened and more and more parts of the 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
community system were run down and fell into an unfavourable situation. The state level politics just 
planned the intervention, but the transition swept out the initiatives. 
After the transition, by the early 1990s, regional differences had sharpened spectacularly in 
Hungary. Nearly one and half million jobs disappeared; production decreased in the former industrial 
centres, the rearrangement of the economic structure began. This afflicted the areas where jobs were 
lost too, therefore sectional crises became regional crisis. The loss of eastern markets, has shaken also 
in agriculture the previous institutional and production system, which was deepened by the political 
willingness to rearrange the former ownership relations. The western regions of the country could 
adjust themselves faster to the changes, since in these regions privatisation took place by the very 
beginning of the 1990s, the economic connections were directed towards Western Europe and the 
foreign capital found advantageous location conditions here. The regional policy by the early 1990s 
focused on crisis management. The rate and real value of the state resources, because of the high 
inflation was not considerable. More governmental programmes have been worked out and used for 
the treatment of the problems in Eastern-, (Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg county) and North-Eastern 
(Borsod-Abaúj-Zemplén, Nógrád counties) Hungary. The governmental sources supported basically 
the extension of infrastructure systems earth gas and drinking water systems, and the improvement of 
transportation connections. The establishment of workplaces in these regions was not successful, since 
their accessibility was poor, and the education of the labour force stands at a low level. The regional 
policy didn’t overlap the other parts of the country, since its financial sources were pretty moderate 
and it didn’t have any comprehensive conception, or unified institutional system. 
The crisis management policy neglected two thirds of the country. In these regions the “grass 
roots” initiatives were significant. From 1990 all settlements had their own local governments, 
therefore in several places the development of the infrastructure system started partly as a local 
initiative, partly with state governmental help. The building of the earth gas, sewage, telephone, cable 
TV systems and partly the road system started at a never before experienced speed. Local activity 
became lively and with it 130–150 small regions have been organised in the country. The 
collaboration of 5–15 municipalities was even supported by international programmes (PHARE 
programme) and as a consequence of this new micro regional co-operations were formed, which 
became the new participants in regional development (they worked out their own regional 
development programmes and conceptions). 
The situation for the conscious forming of regional policy became ripe in 1996. On the one hand, 
state resources increased, 0.2% of the GDP went for regional development support, the participants 
activity was already detectable (counties, small regions, economic players). On the other hand, the 
preparation for European Union Membership, forced the preparation of a conscious regional policy 
and the establishment of its institutional system. 
The XXI./1996. Act, founded the basis of the new Hungarian regional development policy. This 
law specified the goal of regional development. It states: we have to secure the conditions for all the 
regions in this country for the building up of a social market economy, sustainable development, the 
expansion of innovations, the moderation of differences between the capital and the countryside, the 
harmonic development of the spatial structures and the conservation of the local identity. The Act set 
up the unified institutional system of regional development (Figure 13). It determines the duties on 
national, regional, county and small region 
 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
level, outlines the institutional system and the decision makers on the different levels (local 
governments, small regions, representatives of state governments, economic sphere). The law outlines 
the tool of regional development (Regional Development Fund, later Regional Development 
Preliminary Estimate, from 1998 Rural Development Preliminary Estimate), indeed it determines its 
sources, and in a separate statute the principles of apportionment between the different regional units.  
The regional development law gives authority to County Regional Development Councils – which 
were organised on the principle of partnership for decentralised sources. The County Regional 
Development Councils had to work out a development strategy and this was the basis of state sources 
utilisation. The first version of the law gave the counties the right to form regions. The regions would 
have had only a planning- statistical role. 
After the Act was passed in 1996, it started the preparation of the National Regional Development 
Plan, which was passed by parliament in March 1998. The National Regional Development Plan 
determines the direction of future spatial system forming, specifies regional policy’s goals and guiding 
principles assigns the priorities, defines the interventional regions, their types, implementations and 
institutional system. This conception marks out development guidelines even in case of specific 
sectors: environmental protection, human infrastructure, agriculture, industry, tourism, technical 
infrastructure and finally it comprehends the regional policy principles of the preparation for European 
Union membership. 
The Hungarian regional development policy with the XXI./1996. Act and with the national, 
regional and county level regional development strategies started the preparation of a unified system, 
which is based on the principles of the European Union’s regional policy, on its practice and 
institutions.  
In 1999 the Regional Development Law was amended (XCII./1999.). The goal of this amendment 
was on one hand the strengthening of the regional level (the former regional initiatives were 
strengthening, therefore it separated seven planning statistical regions), on the other hand the 
enforcement of the legal control and the rearrangement of the regional development’s representatives 
in the institutional system on the ground of the changed political values. We have only two years 
knowledge of the functioning of the new policy; therefore we don’t have too much experience about it. 
Although, we can point out, that the County Regional Development Councils were established, they 
established and accepted their regional development conceptions, they founded their working 
committees and started the preparation of development projects. The County Regional Development 
Councils decides on the utilisation of the regional development’s decentralised sources (Table 8). 
Even these moderate sources furthered significant local initiatives. The Regional Councils prepared 
their development conception and the programme period started. In the future they will have separate 
state sources, which will be utilised by their working committees.  
Table 8 
The regional development subsidies compared to the GDP 
Region 
GNP billion Ft (GDP)
Regional development 
Ratio of subsidies 
billion Ft 
subsidies (million Ft) 
% of GDP 
1995 1996 1997 1996 1997 1998 1996/
1996/
1997/ 
1995 
1995 
1998 
Central-Hungary 
2240 2861 3613  685 1013 1584 0,31  0,35  0,44 
Central-Transdanubia  557 683 899 912 1161 1662 1,64 1,70 1,85 
West-Transdanubia 559 
701 
881 590 869 1503 1,06 1,24 1,71 
South-Transdanubia 
462  530  646 1051 1480 2351 2,27  2,79  3,64 
North-Hungary 
521  597  731 2273 2620 3543 4,36  4,39  4,85 
North-Great Hungarian 
601  728  896 2519 3424 4353 4,19  4,7  4,86 
Plain 
South-Great Hungarian 
622  745  893 1671 2634 3503 2,69  3,54  3,92 
Plain 
Country 
total 
5562 6845 8556 9700 13200 18500 1,74  1,93  2,16 
Sources: KSH 1999. 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
 
Regional policy changed fundamentally in the last ten years in Hungary. It started as crisis 
management and today it has a comprehensive development conception and an institutional system on 
a national, regional and county level with a constant increasing state subsidy. This institutional system 
is more and more prepared for the professional utilisation of the subsidies from the European Union, 
since more regional development projects have run their course successfully, and have just started 
preparation for receipt of the EU prejoining funds (SAPHARD, ISPA). 
The weaknesses of the Hungarian regional development policy are: 
•  The tasks from different levels – regional, county, small region – are not clearly established, 
they are built on each other, therefore in some cases we can find overlapping and parallelism.  
•  According to the amendments the representatives of employers (economic chambers), 
employees (labour councils) and small regions (grass root organisations, only to some extent) 
are not members in the Regional Development Councils (neither on county, nor on regional 
level), therefore the co-operation possibilities between the regional development players became 
weaker, 
•  The activation of the private sphere’s sources wasn’t successful, due to the lack of 
decentralisation and predetermined utilisation. Ministerial order determines in every year the 
utilisation of the decentralised sources (the principles and the possible measurement of the 
subsidies), 
•  Regional development is not widely known and its societal ranking is low. It is considered to be 
a (local) governmental task. Not even the majority of the possible participants can understand its 
importance and content. It is the consequence of the fact that even on a governmental level the 
regional development, the countryside development and agricultural development are mixed. 
•  On the small region level the management has not set up yet. The number of professionals is 
limited, therefore the co-operation, co-ordination and harmonisation of the different projects on 
the regional, county and small region level is weak.  
We still need to develop the Hungarian regional policy. We have to clarify the tasks of the regional 
level and increase the co-operation between participants. We have to activate the regional financing 
sources, expand the functions of the institutional system (monitoring) and of course increase the ratio 
of state subsidies. Beside the above a regional development system was established, which is able to 
follow and apply the regional policy principles of the EU. Taking account of these facts, there is no 
place for criticism of our preparedness for joining.  
To prove the above, we have to show the regression line of the connection between the regional 
GDP and the state fund for regional development subsidies and between the regional GDP and the 
central fund for economic assistance (Economical Development Preliminary Estimate)(Figure 14.) 
In the first case – because of the specific distribution – the curve shows a mellow negative 
steepness, it means the increasing subsidies don’t have a detectable impact on regional GDP. In the 
second case the curve has a slight positive steepness, it means the economic development subsidies (in 
a small measure) influenced the regional GDP, although the connection is moderate. We can point out 
a weak connection between the two factors. This indicates, that although the subsidies for regional 
equalisation are initially political interventions, the definite economic development actions can have a 
positive impact on the active regions. 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
 
 
 
 
The analysis touches the basic question of regional policy: In which extent and form can we (do we 
have to) subsidise the crisis regions? The regional policy of the transition couldn’t answer this 
question clearly, it remained with the, a modern market economies applied regional policy, based on 
subsidies principles. It had an unsuccessful attempt to equalise the regions. On the one hand it couldn’t 
make any progress because of the deep and multiple factor crisis in the regional structure. On the other 
hand its development sources are moderate and divided, therefore it couldn’t demonstrate spectacular 
results. 
In the first part of the transition, we had to forget the planning, the preparation of projects for the 
regional level. We made only small region or local projects as a crisis management, to help the 
depressed regions catch up. In the second period of the transition, according to the regional 
development law, the planning at regional level is coming back. However by the late 1990s we still 
don’t have a national development plan and directives, which could be a guiding principle for the 
regions and who could point out the development directions for the regions (Rechnitzer J. 1997b). 
The National Regional Development Plan (OTK) was born in 1998, representing the regional 
policy principles of the E.U. However it looks only to the western part of Europe, that is why it 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
became a one-pole conception. The OTK doesn’t speak about the specific situation of the country (the 
favourable geographical position in Central-Europe), it doesn’t outline directions for the further 
development and possible future co-operations. The building up of the grass roots shows up only in 
the principles, since the regional (county) levels didn’t yet articulate their development goals, therefore 
these are either individual or general information for the national planning. The majority of the 
participants – because of the regional institutional system, scopes, lack of sources and identity – didn’t 
realise the necessity of the strategy and the programming built on it. Therefore their activity remained 
on the surface; they didn’t have a clear vision of the future and connected system of goals. 
Therefore it is characteristic, that the country planning disappeared, and later with the regional 
development law appeared again. At the same time the search for new methods occured and 
techniques of forming regional development, which helps the participants gradually towards co-
operation, furthermore to a conscious realisation of the regional conditions and possibilities and later 
the forming of strategic aspects. 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
2  The changes of spatial structure, the spaces of the transition  
The transition rearranges the spatial structure; regional differences are forming and strengthening. At 
the same time they represent different development directions. According to our previous researches 
(Rechnitzer J. 1993.) we can say, that the spatial structure of the country became more divided, while 
the gap between the two contrary poles (capital-countryside and west-east) increased, a significant 
number of regions entered a transient phase, their future movement is uncertain and ambiguous.  
To prove this statement, we compared regional economy (by counties) with the same indexes and 
methods10 in 1991 at the beginning of the transition and in 1995 close to its end (Figure 15.) 
In the first year of the transition (1991) we could notice seven clearly separated groups. The capital 
was a well-separated independent group, far away from the others; it had highly concentrated the 
regional indexes, in fact its values were not comparable even with the best county. The development 
distance in a regional economy of Budapest from the counties is really spectacular. We can’t compare 
the Hungarian capital with the regions on the countryside, we have to compare its regional characters, 
new roles with other Central European centres, e.g.: Vienna, Prague, Warsaw, Zagreb, Belgrad, and 
we should prepare development strategies in connection with these. 
The connection of the West-Hungarian group (Gyõr-Moson-Sopron, Vas, Zala) is defined by the 
foreign active capital, size of investments, that time still moderate unemployment, telephone supply 
and the similar presence of enterprises. Within this group Zala county shows a weak similarity with 
the other two counties, in fact in a number of indexes indicates similarity with the fourth, South group. 
The Central-Hungarian group is organised by the investments, the ratio of personal income 
tax and the numbers of vehicles. Komárom-Esztergom county is an independent unit, where 
at this time the large-scale industry still functions, its investments indexes are favourable and 
also personal income tax contributed to the 
 
                                                      
10 The 11 indexes were as follows: the regional GDP, foreign active capital, measurement of investments, unemployment, 
legal entity and non legal entity economic companies, measurement of industrial tax, number of cars, telephone system, 
branch bank density. The indexes are per capita, similar in both data, we worked out the tightness of connections with 
multivariate analysis, which has shown in the majority a clear connection, and we formed due to unified principles, clear 
separation the groups in the claster analysis.  
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
forming of this independent group. Only Fejér county indicates a similarity with Veszprém county 
(South-Hungarian group). Their characteristic are the large-scale industry and the high unemployment. 
The South-Hungarian group is characterised by the moderate presence of the foreign capital, the 
about average unemployment ratio, the moderate entrepreneur activity and the relatively high degree 
of car supply. There are interesting similarity connections here and Csongrád-Baranya and Veszprém-
Somogy (counties adjacent to Balaton) -Tolna undergroups were formed. 
East-Hungary was strongly divided in 1991. One group, North-East Hungary is composed of 
Borsod-Abaúj-Zemplén, Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg and Jász-Nagykun-Szolnok counties. It is 
characterised by the low service sector (bank density) and the relative high, close to average local tax 
(this is due to the present large-scale industry). The other East-Hungarian group is characterised by the 
higher entrepreneur activity (non-legal entity enterprises), the more moderate unemployment rate and 
the high degree of car supply. The two groups are separated from each other; considerable similarities 
are only within the groups. We can only register three connection or similarity directions in case of 
Heves county, which shows the possible future economic directions, or its unsecured position. There 
are similarities in the spatial economic structures of the two groups, but the total value of the Eastern 
group is closer to the Southern counties, while the North-Eastern counties are closer to the Central-
Hungarian group. 
In the first years of the transition the regional economy shows a divided spatial structure, although 
there can be found similarly developed groups, the insecurity of the development courses are marked 
by the overlapping and similarities of certain elements. The spatial structure is still pliable, but there 
are already stable points, separable and characteristic development directions. 
The regional economy has changed by 1995, the blocks became more resolute, and instead of the 
previous seven there are only six groups. The routes of development have differed. Compared to the 
previous time the individual connections between the groups have diminished, there are more 
characteristic undergroups within the clusters.  
It is not possible to catch up with the capital; it is still separated from the other parts of the country. 
The leading county from the “Western group” (Gyõr-Moson-Sopron) could catch up a little (6%) from 
its previous position, while Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg is 2% further behind it. The constant separation 
of Budapest in the regional structure is a Hungarian characteristic. The strategic goal of the capital’s 
development could be, to spread out its favourable influence into more levels and directions, basically 
to the regional centres and through them to the countryside. 
Zala county is separated from the West-Hungarian group, and it is interesting that few areas of 
similarity developed, it means they are still together, but they are together separated from the other 
groups. Gyõr-Moson-Sopron started a new development course whose direction and type is probably 
more dynamic.  
The South-Hungarian group formed a definite block. A new member is Zala county, which has 
fallen back, and Bács-Kiskun, which has caught up Baranya. The regional structure shows similarity 
in a number of ways to the groups Central-, and East-Hungary, which indicates that it is a temporal 
block, it can dissolve at any time, its structure is not stable yet. The expanding foreign capital and the 
favourable reception of services can generate this rearrangement in the future. 
Komárom-Esztergom county joined to the Central-Hungarian group and we can already notice the 
internal similarities between the members. On a group level, compared to the previous period, 
investment has increased. Within this, foreign capital became more important, although 
entrepreneurial activity is still weak, the degree of telephone supply and the financial services are still 
significantly below the country average. This cluster is closest to the South-Hungarian group, and 
interesting in that it moved away from the West-Hungarian group. 
Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg county separated from the North-Eastern group, but Heves county joined 
it, which indicates a constant rearrangement in the north-eastern regions of the country. The group 
moved closer to the East-Hungarian cluster, while its distance from the western counties grew, 
although its proximity to the southern regions remained, which could reveal a possible future 
rearrangement direction. (This is strengthened by the fact, that Heves county preserved its assessable 
similarity to one southern county albeit with weak conditions). 
The Eastern Axis is composed of Hajdú-Bihar, Békés and Nógrád counties, with clear weak 
indexes ever further from the other groups. The inner cohesion is strong, especially at the counties 
adjacent to the eastern border, while Nógrád is closer to Békés and Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg. The 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
separation of Hajdú-Bihar is predictable. The danger for this eastern block can be, that their distance to 
the southern development course since 1991 has increased, this means the fall will be much more 
spectacular.  
The transition’s spatial structure can be characterised by clear separation, where the differences are 
not only present, but they rearrange themselves. In consequence of this the regions are moving closer 
to and further away from each other, and within the regions, blocks with similar growth courses are 
developing.  
Therefore the reaction to the transition is different in each region, the preparation of the regional 
economy’s players, the condition and spatial situation of their resources are the influences which 
decide their individual development or more precisely adjustment courses. In the spatial structure 
Budapest is constantly separated, its economy is not comparable with the other parts of the country, 
however its impact on the regional economy is significant. The transition in Budapest is probably 
finished; the elements of the new structure are already functioning. From the point of the country’s 
spatial structure it is important, in which form and mechanism its expansion will occur. Two western 
counties are close to the end of the transition. Gyõr-Moson-Sopron county is slightly ahead; the 
separation of the regional economies from the other parts of the country became more and more 
marked. The economy of the Central-, and South-Hungarian regions show a flexible situation. There 
are signs showing stabilisation, but the structural organising elements are still weak (depending on the 
region either the foreign capital or the services sector), therefore we can find several uncertainties, and 
unpredictable future courses of development. In the eastern part of the country we could determine 
two transition types. The first one is closer to the Central-, and South-Hungarian group, therefore it 
can bring advantageous movements. In the second group the backwardness of the counties adjacent to 
the south-eastern border and Nógrád county still continues, we can detect strong blocks, Hajdú-Bihar 
is the only one which will probably be able to separate itself from this group.  
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
3  Regional dilemmas after the transition 
The Hungarian spatial structure indicates permanent changes. Even the basic rearrangements didn’t 
accomplish yet, indeed certain directions are strengthening, while new phenomena appear, we don’t 
know yet their impact, therefore we can’t react on them. Several new problems came to the surface 
and we have to prepare us to deal with them, while we need to do more and more in order to prepare 
for the EU membership. Let’s take a look at the more significant regional problems and the possible 
reaction to them, before joining the EU. 
3.1 Regional differences 
The regional differences in the country didn’t decrease, indeed it is clearly noticeable that in the 
central regions (Central-, South-Transdanubia and Between Danube and Tisza) the uncertainty of the 
transition prevail, while the backwardness of the eastern region became more and more spectacular. 
Besides the constant divergence of the traditional regional development indexes (GDP, employment, 
unemployment rate), we can notice a convergence in the indexes of the infrastructure systems on 
municipality level.  
Therefore the separation of the country continues. Its dimensions are: Budapest – countryside, 
West (Pannonien) – East (Great Hungarian Plain), Central and South Hungary. The innovative 
migration to the western regions started already, which is accompanied by legal and illegal capital 
movements. The income differences remain constant within the municipality system, but throughout 
the whole spatial structure too, and that may increase the political societal tensions on regional level in 
the future.  
Although regional lobbies in the politics have not developed yet, their forming started already. 
Regional interests are still under the surface, but they are stretching the institutional framework and 
probably after the year 2000 they will appear in consequence of the strong presence of EU 
subsidisation.  
3.2 The place and role of Budapest in Central-Europe 
The political and societal players of the Vienna region decisively intend to become the organisational, 
informational and financial centre of the Central-European region. The difference between Vienna and 
Budapest is, that the Austrian capital has significant financial resources and the support of EU to reach 
this goal. On the contrary Budapest has poorer resources and it is permanently in opposition with the 
government and its policy, therefore the infrastructure modernisation of the capital is moderate. In 
spite of this, the foreign investors look at Budapest as a place of possibilities, therefore the 
rearrangement of its commercial system, the building of administration buildings for the service 
sector, goes very dynamically. The city infrastructure gradually drops behind the economical sector’s 
institutional system, which may cause constant disturbance in the city functions.  
In spite of these Budapest is still not “invented”. It has not been decided yet (though there is an 
actual development conception): which are the new roles of the Hungarian capital, how can those 
connect to the domestic regional development, how can it connect to the Central-European settlement 
system and which expansion of system roles is important in order to connect to the European city 
system more definitely.  
Which direction will Budapest develop? Which are in the future new international, financial, 
economic, organisational, cultural and scientific functions, which will influence the development of its 
macro region, the Carpathian-basin and furthermore Central-Europe? Which of these future functions 
are already in Budapest and can settle down soon? What are their demands towards the city’s 
infrastructure system? These are the questions to be answered. If Budapest can not invent itself, its 
future will be the result of spontaneous processes, and the countryside will not be able to find the 
stable sources for its renewal either. Since Budapest has always been the number one centre of 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
reception and expansion of innovation in Hungary, the future of Budapest can’t be uninteresting 
considering the forming of domestic regional processes. We have to see that the long-term opposition 
of the capital’s local government and the state government doesn’t favour the expansion of the renewal 
processes, indeed it delays them and therefore it can slow down the transition of the domestic spatial 
structure.  
3.3 Co-operation in the border regions 
Hungary is situated in the centre of the Carpathian basin and bordered with seven countries. From the 
neighbouring countries one (Austria) is a member of the EU and one (Slovenia) will probably be a 
member, so the border section with the E.U. is going to be 458 km. The chances of the other five 
countries are not very good to join to the European economic and political integration before the end 
of the first decades in the 21. century. With these countries Hungary has nearly 1800 km long border 
section, which is 80% of its borders. It means Hungary has become a “turntable” or “gate-country” in 
the unifying European economic and political space towards East-, and South-Europe. 
We mustn’t forget, that on the other side of this 1800 km long border section live nearly 3.6 million 
ethnic Hungarians, whose connections with the “mother country” must be secured in the long term. In 
border regions ethnic Hungarians from neighbouring countries are important transmitters of the 
economic and societal connections, therefore a new development and communication city-belt could 
be established from Komárom until Szentgotthárd. This city-belt can be the transmitter of the 
European and Hungarian economic, societal and cultural processes and in consequence their former 
peripheral situation is revaluating, basically changing fundamentally.  
The cross-border co-operations can open new dimensions for the Hungarian regional development 
and spatial structure. These organisational and institutional cross border co-operations can contribute 
to improving the situation of the Hungarians in the neighbouring countries, since there is specific, 
multiple and all day communication in the border region. The EU does and will in the future support 
the co-operation in the border regions in the associated (or wanting to be associated) countries, 
therefore their national political factors must tolerate the tighter connections and even promote them. 
With the Euroregions new institutional frames can be established and they can become independent 
from the strong centralised state control, which is a characteristics of all our neighbouring countries, 
except Austria. In consequence these new regional level networks can be founded, which can open 
new dimensions for connections.  
The importance of the cross border co-operations should increase due to the principals of the 
regional policy. It should become a “polarised” connection. One side is the preparing of the regional 
units to the European integration. The other side is promoting the establishment of the Central 
European regional co-operations. This can help the eastern and southern countryside to line up, to 
develop their centres and expand their spatial impacts. 
3.4 The local governmental system and the civic sphere 
The local governments from the days of transition, could utilise more and more sources during the last 
ten years, which is true on regional and also on local level. On regional level there are sources 
connected to regional development, which is currently 0.2% of the GDP and the ratio of these 
decentralised sources should increase up to 1.5-1.8%. The regional level with the increased sources 
can urge the local level and the other regional development participants, to joint development and to 
establish the necessary partner connections. We can notice more and more function problems on local 
level, at the local governments. It is difficult and multiple problem, we can trace it back to 
governmental steps as well as to the frittered, scattered local governmental system. We can’t avoid the 
future reforms of the administrative systems, the merge some of the currently 3200 local governments 
and institutions. The developing small region co-operations – currently we can detect 180–200 such 
organisations- were established to obtain the development sources but they can be the seed of the 
future organisational and institutional co-operations on regional level. 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
The reforms will be necessary not only on the level of local governments but even in the regional 
mediator systems of state functions. The direction of this can be giving the previous tasks to local 
levels, or the regionalisation of the institutional system and creating the conditions of political 
regionalisation. 
According to the European experience along with the stabilisation of the economic system the 
interest of citizens turns gradually away from national politics towards the local regional level, which 
gives them more space and success. We can expect the growth of the local regional politics areas, 
which accompanies the expansion of the local regional civil organisations with their increasing role in 
community cases. Interest areas of the civil organisations demand the renewal of the former frame-
work in the municipal and regional politics as well as a show of new directions of the regional and 
municipal development. In the future those municipalities and regions can be successful, which can 
integrate the new sources of the civil sphere.  
3.5 Regionalisation 
Regionalisation is tightly connected to administration but because of its importance we have to look at 
this factor from our future point of view separately. Hungarian administration was centralised during 
the last thousand years. By the beginning of the new millennium, the decentralisation of the 
administration became necessary, with the establishment of its institutional system as wide as possible. 
The centralisation always represents branch like point of view while the decentralisation prefers 
regional level thinking and acting. From the early days a long combat started between the two points 
of views, where unfortunately often the centralisation and with it the branch- like point of view is the 
winner. Despite the failures more and more elements of decentralisation and regional point of view 
can be noticed. After economic stabilisation, increasing societal and civil control and the state giving 
up more and more functions, more and more possibilities offered by the spatial system will be 
available through the creation of the institutional system of decentralisation.  
The creation of the seven regions is accomplished (Table 9, Figure 16) but they are not functioning 
yet, they couldn’t involve the players of regional development, they are only functioning as 
deconcentrate institutions with moderate and limited sources. The real players of the development- the 
economic units- are not interested in the regional “games”. Regions don’t have any scope of authority, 
their tasks are not specified, it is not clear what kind of separated duties could be between county and 
the regional level authorities in regional development and how they are connected. The political 
factors considered to be serious confuse the regional development with the country side development 
and they tightly connect to the renewal of the agricultural sector, which disturbs the unfinished 
institutional system and also the participants of regional development. 
Table 9 
Some characteristic data of the planning-statistical region 1998 
(National average 100%) 
Indexes 
Central  Central 
West 
South 
North 
North 
South 
Hungary  Transdan Transdan Transdan Hungary
Great 
Great 
ubia 
ubia 
ubia 
Hungaria Hungaria
n Plain 
n Plain 
GDP 1994 
145,6 
86,4 
100,7 
84,0 69,6 73,9 83,3 
GDP 1995 
142,1 
91,7 
102,8 
85,1 73,7 71,7 83,3 
GDP 1996 
147,5 
91,2 
104,6 
79,5 68,6 70,2 81,1 
Economic activity 
106,8 
102,5 108,6 96,1 92,0 90,2 98,7 
Unemployment rate 
53,3 
93,3  71,4 120,0 158,1 157,1 102,9 
Total active enterprises 
136,1 90,4 98,1 95,1 68,5 75,6 93,7 
Private enterprises 
115,0 
98,9 108,6 102,7  75,2  83,5 103,1 
Foreign registered capital 
217,3 60,3 88,3 39,3 71,3 35,5 37,3 
Number 
of 
cars 
124,9 96,2 104,2 99,0 78,9 76,3 94,9 
Number of telephone lines  143,7 81,2 100,4 93,9 82,4 70,1 77,0 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
Gross average wage 
137,6 
107,7 102,2 98,5 97,0 93,3 96,2 
Net 
average 
wage 
 
117,6 97,4 93,7 91,1 89,8 87,3 89,4 
Investment 150,3 
111,4 
124,6 58,8 76,7 52,7 70,7 
Total resources of local 
125,5 100,0 106,5 87,7 89,7 81,4 81,2 
governments 
Remarks: every index is compared to the inhabitants (except: unemployment rate) 
Source: Regional Statistical Yearbook, 1998 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
The real regionalisation is slower than the country’s preparation speed to the EU membership. It 
would be important to activate this source more and give clear political support to the regionalisation 
of the institutional system and resources, rather than the creeping decentralisation. Failing that 
distributing available subsidies after joining the EU again the branch-like participants will be the 
majority, which will deteriorate their utilisation and will have a negative impact on the forming of 
regional structure. 
3.6 Environmental thinking 
Multiple connections of regional and ecological processes are important. One can not imagine regional 
development without exact and methodical environmental impact studies and at the same time there 
are more and more actions organised for the prevention and conservation of the municipality and 
landscape values and their utilisation based on sustainable development. The challenge of the 
environmental point of view is constant but the way of thinking has to be changed just like the 
regional economy management and the interest systems.  
3.7 Preparation for the EU Membership 
Preparation for the EU membership started already. The regional policy made its first steps. During 
the next years the participants of regional development, must learn walking, then running, in order to 
become “well trained” regions, counties and municipalities in Hungary, which are able to receive the 
developments after joining the EU. Only the prepared regional units can use the advantages given by 
the EU membership, in order to help the nation. 
The participants would become uncertain if the joining is being postponed, since the deadline is 
uncertain, The Council of the EU is floating the date of the membership, therefore one can’t plan and 
program the future. There are no clearly defined criteria, so one doesn’t know when one is “ripe” for 
joining the EU. There is permanent comparing with the other associated members. This compels to 
bring several uncertain and early measures, which can hardly build into the domestic political, societal 
and institutional structure. Several “nicely forced” institutional models are formed and introduced. For 
example the institution of regions, which isn’t even functioning in several EU countries (e.g.: Ireland, 
Portugal, Denmark, Holland or Greece). The rules of the planning system (Comprehensive 
Development Plan, National Development Plan) are not clear either; their preparation method causes 
significant problems with the different sectors and on regional level too. The programming system is 
forming in an uncertain way on regional, county and small region level, since the activity of the 
participants is not known, we can’t forecast the size of local and central sources either. We can 
mention the really uncertain monitoring system, since its methods and institutions are not well 
developed even in the countries of the EU, or the measuring of the impacts of regional subsidies. In 
the EU tender system the rules are not clear, the decision processes are long and complicate, clearing 
of accounts is difficult. Remember the constant threat, that Hungary is not able to use e.g.: PHARE 
sources, but in several cases because of the Committee’s slow decision making and unclear conception 
meant that there was no feedback about the tenders, about the allowance of application. Therefore 
participants lost their enthusiasm, and used their own sources for other goals. Imported experts and 
their organisations win the important tenders; they don’t have local knowledge and information. They 
are thinking according to the EU models and institutional structures, while they don’t take into 
consideration several national and regional characteristics, and put them into an EU panel, which is 
not yet or no more used in our country.  
Significant element of the preparation is that the participants of regional development gain exact 
knowledge about the real functioning of the EU’s regional policy. Processing and working this 
information into the functioning of the regional-system is one of the most important tasks of the next 
years. 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
*** 
The Hungarian regional policy before the EU membership, has several tasks. The scientific basis of 
the policy is excellent; it reflects the characteristics of the European regional processes, the 
development routes for the next century and their application techniques. The regional processes of the 
transition are practically accomplished. Every regional level has got a development conception; the 
programmes will be prepared according to those. Within a year the regional units will have the 
development directions and the application methods. Even the other participants of regional 
development started to realise that there are possibilities for their own development goals the regional 
dimensions. The decentralisation is going slowly, the development of the institutional system doesn’t 
get enough support and moving the sources to the regional level is only going with a moderate speed. 
The Hungarian regional and institutional system, with sufficient political attention and support, could 
become capable to receive the EU subsidies and can be a significant element to make the entire 
country to catch up. 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
Bibliography 
Dancs, L. 1999: Határon átnyúló kapcsolatok az Északkelet-Alföldön.  Északkelet-Magyarország és a határok 
(Cross-border relations in the North-Eastern part of the Great Hungarian Plain). Szerk. Baranyi B. MTA 
RKK Alföldi Tudományos Intézete, Debreceni Csoport, Debrecen. pp. 329–371. (Kézirat) 
Dankó, L.– G. Fekete, É. 1996: Az országhatáron átnyúló gazdasági kapcsolatok és ezek kölcsönhatása a területi 
fejlődésre Északkelet-Magyarországon (Cross-border economic relations and those effects on regional 
development). MTA RKK Észak-magyarországi Osztálya, Miskolc. (Kézirat) 
Diczházi, B. 1997: Külföldi tőkebefektetések hatása a regionális gazdaságra.(Foreign capital investment and its 
effects on the regional economy)  – Tér és Társadalom, 2. pp. 67–91. 
Egyedi, Gy. 1994: Területfejlesztés és regionális átalakulás a posztszocialista Magyarországon (Regional 
development and regional transformation in the post-socialist Hungary). – Társadalmi Szemle, 8–9. pp. 133–
140. 
Enyedi, Gy. 1996: Regionális folyamatok Magyarországon az átmenet időszakában. (Regional processes in 
Hungary during the transition). Hilscher Rezső Szociálpolitikai Egyesület, Budapest (Ember, Település, 
Régió). 
Enyedi, Gy. 1997: A sikeres város (Succesful city). – Tér és Társadalom, 4. pp. 1–7.  
Golobics, P. 1995: A határ menti térségek városainak szerepe a regionális együttműködésben. Közlemények a 
JPTE Általános Társadalomföldrajzi és Urbanisztikai Tanszékéről, 3. Pécs. 
Hajdú, Z. 1996: A magyar–horvát határ menti együttműködés dilemmái (Dilemmas of cross-border coopearation 
along the Hungarian-Croatian borders). – Pál Á.–Szónokyné Ancsin G. (eds): Határon innen – határon túl. 
Nemzetközi Földrajzi Tudományos Konferencia.
 JPTE, Szeged, pp. 306–313.  
Horváth Gy.–Illés I. 1997: Regionális fejlődés és politika (Regional development and policy).  Integrációs 
Stratégiai Munkacsoport, Budapest (Európai Tükör Műhelytanulmányok, 16) 
Lengyel, I. 1996: Határtalan lehetőségek? Békés megye gazdasága és határ menti kapcsolatai. (Unbounded 
opportunities? Economy and cross border relations of County Békés).  Kőrösi Csoma S. Főiskola, 
Közgazdasági Intézet, Békéscsaba-Gyula. (Kézirat) 
Matolcsy, Gy.–Diczházi, B. 1998: A növekedés regionális forrásai (The regional sources of growth). A „két 
banán” regionális stratégiája. – Társadalmi Szemle, 1. pp. 21–35.  
Nemes Nagy, J. 1998: Átrajzolódó térképek (Redrawn maps). – Kurtán, S.–Sándor P.–Vass L. (eds): 
Magyarország évtizedkönyve. A rendszerváltozás (1988–1998) (Systemic change 1988–1998) II. Demokrácia 
Kutatások Magyar Központja Alapítvány (Foundation  of the Hungarian Centre of Democracy Research). 
Nagykovácsi Kiadó, pp. 657–672. 
Pál, Á. 1996: Dél-alföldi határ menti települések társadalom-gazdaságföldrajzi jelentősége (Socuial-economic 
geographical significance of settlements in the border regions of the Southern Great Plain). – Pál, Á.–
Szónokyné Ancsin, G. (eds): Határon innen – határon túl. Nemzetközi Földrajzi Tudományos Konferencia. 
JPTE, Szeged, pp. 181–191.  
Pálné Kovács I.–Csefkó F. 1997: Önkormányzati szerepvállalás a helyi gazdaság fejlesztésében. (Role of the 
local goverments in the development of the local economy) – Comitatus, július-augusztus, pp. 19–29. 
Pászti Tóth, Gy. 1996: A formálódó Duna–Tisza–Maros Eurorégió.(Forming the Danube–Tisza–Maros 
Euroregion). – Pál Á.–Szónokyné Ancsin G. (eds): Határon innen – határon túl. Nemzetközi Földrajzi 
Tudományos Konferencia.
 JPTE, Szeged, pp. 16–22.  
Rechnitzer, J. (ed.) (1990): A nyitott határ. (Open borders). MTA RKK NYUTI, Győr. 
Rechnitzer, J. 1993: Szétszakadás, vagy felzárkózás (Cleavages and catcing up. Innovations forming regional 
structures) A térszerkezetet alakító innovációk. MTA RKK, Győr. 
Rechnitzer, J. 1997a: Nonprofit szervezetek területi szerkezete (Regional structure of the non-profit 
organisation). Kurtán, S.–Sándor P.–Vass L. (eds): Magyarország évtizedkönyve. A rendszerváltozás (1988–
1998) (Systemic change 1988–1998) II. 
Demokrácia Kutatások Magyar Központja Alapítvány (Foundation  
of the Hungarian Centre of Democracy Research). Nagykovácsi Kiadó, pp. 539–553. 
Rechnitzer, J. 1997b: Jegyzetek a területi tervezés új, régi kihívásaihoz (Notes on the old and new challenges of 
regional planning).  – Tér és Társadalom, 3. pp. 14–22. 
Rechnitzer, J. 1997c: Az Északnyugat-Dunántúl térségének gazdasági adottságai és versenyelőnyei (Economic 
benefits and competitive advantages of the North-West Transdanubia). – Tér és Társadalom, 1. pp. 1–38.  
Rechnitzer, J. 1997d: Eurorégió vázlatok a magyar-osztrák-szlovák határ menti térségben (Draft of an euroregion 
in the border regions of Hungary, Slovakia and Austria). – Tér és Társadalom, 2. sz. pp. 29–58. 
Rechnitzer, J. 1998: A területi stratégiák (Regional strategies). Dialóg Campus Kiadó, Budapest–Pécs.  
Ruttkay, É. 1995: Határok, határmentiség, regionális politika (Borders, borderland situation and regional policy). 
– Commitatus, 1995. december pp. 23-35. 
Süli-Zakar I. 1997: A Kárpátok Eurorégió szerepe a határokon átnyúló kapcsolatok erősítésében. (Role of the 
Carpathian Euroregion in the strengthen of cross border cooperation). – Comitatus, június. pp. 30–44. 
 

Rechnitzer, János : The Features of the Transition of Hungary’s Regional System. 
Pécs : Centre for Regional Studies, 2000. 54. p. 
Discussion Papers , No. 32.
Szörényi, Zs. 1999: PHARE CBC: pro és kontra. Átfedések a Phare CBC program és Győr-Moson-Sopron 
megye területfejlesztési koncepció között (PHARE CBC: the pro and contra. Overlaps between the PHARE 
CBC Program and the Regional Development Conception of Győr-Moson-Sopron county). – Tér és 
Társadalom, 
1–2. pp. 161–184.  
Tatai, Z. 1994: A területfejlesztés cél- és eszközrendszere a kilencvenes évtized közepén. (Objectives and tasks 
of the regional development in the mid 1990s). – Comitatus, 11. pp. 7–29.  
Tóth, J. 1996: A Kárpát-medence és a nemzetközi regionális együttműködés (Carpathian Basin and the 
international regional cooperation) – Pál Á.–Szónokyné Ancsin G. (eds): Határon innen –határon túl. 
Nemzetközi Földrajzi Tudományos Konferencia.
 JPTE, Szeged, pp. 22–27.  
Vuics, T. 1996: A határ menti együttműködés lehetőségei Baranya megyében (Opportunities of the cross-border 
cooperation in County Baranya). – Pál Á.–Szónokyné Ancsin G. (eds): Határon innen – határon túl. 
Nemzetközi Földrajzi Tudományos Konferencia.
 JPTE, Szeged, pp. 299–306.