Impact assessment on the Hungarian urban network Szepesi Balázs Lead 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 Delphi, worksho p IUD questio- narry Litera- ture Data analysis Document analysis Expert interview Town profile IUD analysis 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): QualityWealth 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!