Impact assessment on the Hungarian urban network

Szepesi BalázsLead Researcher

Workshop

Territorial development evaluations

April 25, 2013

Contents

• Goals, tasks, methods of the assessment

• Results

• Recommendations

2

Tasks of the assessment

3

Recommendations based on in-depth analysis aiming the system of development policy.

Tasks and methods

4

• 81 IUD questionarries• Delphi: 35 participants in

first round, 27 in second round, 40 in workshop

• 20 expert interviews• 20 case studies on towns• 13 local IUD interviews• 71 projects analyzed• 19 documents on

development policy analyzed

Urban network trends

Wealth, quality, attractiveness, location

1. Attractiveness and pace of development in wealth positively correlates with the size of the town and central location

2. Proximity of motorways strongly affects economic development.

3. Setback of backward towns grows by time.

4. The increase of wealth improves quality but has no effect on attractiveness.

5. There is no link between attractiveness and wealth.

5

Findings – urban network

• Urban rank and urban function differs (1990: 166 towns; 2012: 328 towns).

• Good accessibility is the main factor to define the attractiveness and wealth of a town.

• Development deficit of lagging towns grows with an accelerating pace.

• Central subsidies for towns considerately shrunk, therefore local debts increased.

• From 2013: task-based financing, consolidation of municipalities.

6

Findings – urban network

7

Towns performing the highest/lowest values according to the variables examined (2010):

Quality Wealth

Attractiveness Development

Findings – financing

• Main aspects affecting resource allocation:– population, economic power– influential mayor– capacity for proposal writing and project management– good informal network– development strategy

• Aspects of territorial development get little emphasis – with the exception of the LAMR program and the key projects of towns at county rank.

• Overall, it has not been proven that towns with better situation in 2007 got more funding (excluding the effect of key projects).

8

Findings – developmental routines

• Most popular programs: small-scale and diversifying urban revitalisation, development of business premises

• Experts say that urban success is based on a sound strategy, sound leadership and sound economy

• Inter-municipal cooperations are sparse, mostly covering exchange of expertise and common lobbying

• Rates of resource absorption is acceptable, though the actual benefits of projects are often questionable

9

Findings:Integrated Urban Development (IUD)

− 45% of towns do not follow the IUD in their development activity;− There is no correlation between the quality of the IUD and

resource absorption;− Regulatory framework does not guarantee connecting IUDs to

local, regional, and national development plans;− Typically, IUDs are not harmonized with those of other towns

and/or the agglomeration;• Local experts say that expanding IUD to micro-regional level is

necessary;• Urban social revitalisation is a less popular program, given the

discrepancy of problems and sources;• To make urban diversifying revitialisation projects induce

spillover effects, a receptive local environment is needed;+ Setting up urban development offices is becoming more frequent,

especially in larger towns;+ IUDs actively contibuted to the strenghtening of local strategic

thinking.

10

Suggestions #1

1. Success should be measured on development effects instead of fund allocation.

2. Realistic frameworks for inter-urban cooperations are needed to be set up, especially regarding links between counties and towns at county rank.

3. Larger emphasis should be put on harmonizing local and national development plans.

4. Instead of creating new infrastructure and capacities, emphasis should be put on revitalising the existing ones and improve their efficiency.

5. Predicability of fund allocation is a key issue.6. It is crucial for town leaders to implement tangible and

visible developments.

11

Suggestions #2

7. Balancing responsibilities and opportunities in the grant system has great importance as well as keeping administrative duties realistic and moderated.

8. There is a need for dedicated national plans and execution agendas for developments of government competence (i.e. education, health, transportation).

9. For managing micro-regional development programs a three-legged system is suggested:– local development programs;– national development programs involving local

bodies into implementation;– national development programs backed by local

reconciliation.

12

Suggestions #3

• Features of a local development program:a) Implementation of local (aggloomeration wide)

developments based on local management and institutions;

b) Local decision on actions, beneficiaries, and participants;

c) programs covering whole development periods;d) government elaborates the framework, then

cooperates with the local level in an equal manner;e) urban focus: ITI/key project/global grant;f) micro-regional focus: local and cooperating

developments in the frame of ITI or CLLD;g) using execution models based on performance,

credibility, or standards, depeding on the area of use.

13

Thank you for your time!

szepesibalazs@hetfa.hu