Modern Cities Program: new chapter in the Hungarian urban policy

Abstract

This paper analyses the Modern Cities Program (MCP) with the key question of whether the MCP is a new chapter in Hungarian urban policy and whether it contributes to the successful development of cities. From a historical point of view, the programme follows earlier trends, as Hungary has not yet had an explicit urban policy. The MCP has not changed that.

The programme was launched in March 2015 and focused on the county-level cities, which are the defining elements of the Hungarian urban network. Thus, if its projects are implemented, the MCP will have an impact on the entire Hungarian urban network. The programme has a strongly political character: the Prime Minister has personally launched the programme in each city by agreeing on a local project list. The MCP has no official documentation in the form of a preliminary impact assessment, concept or implementation provisions. However, the objectives ofthe programme are known and considered to be appropriate.

Almost half of the 258 identified projects feature in previous development strategies, but the extent varies from city to city (0–82%). The government estimates the expenditure at about 10.5-10.8 billion euros, but only 8.3 billion euros could be identified in our research, a considerable amount after all. The budget was analysed according to sectors and spatial distribution. It shows that the allocation of funds for transport projects is dominant (73.5%). The reason for this is that the expansion ofmotorways and railways is included in the programme. But even without these large extra-urban infrastructure measures, most of the resources are earmarked for transport projects.

Typical projects are an intermodal transport centre, the creation of new industrial areas, the renovation of theatres, the construction of sports centres and hotels and the renovation and extension of secondary schools. An analysis of spatiality shows that without the major infrastructure projects (30), all of which inevitably have a regional impact, the following breakdown can be seen: 5% have a regional impact, 27% are regional in function and 68% have urban reach.

Finally, management and communication of the program were studied at central and local levels. The first two years produced few results, after which a minister with no portfolio was entrusted with the MCP. But after the national elections of 2018, this office was not filled again. Only one city has its own organisational unit for coordinating the MCP projects, and only two cities have detailed information about the projects on their web portal.

The author considers the analysis of this new mechanism of regional policy to be useful because it shows how the MCP fits into the history ofprevious urban policy, how it harmonises with local development concepts and what effects can be expected. Finally, the paper discusses the connection between MCP and Enyedi’s catalogue for a successful city and outlines some policy proposals.