Urban governance in a historical perspective? - The case studies of Vienna and Budapest during the period of the Austro–Hungarian Monarchy

Abstract

The theory of urban governance emerged in the 1970s and ever since that a significant number of international and Hungarian case studies have been published. The majority of these studies, however highlight the fact that the new approach of urban governance replaced the former state-influenced “urban government” principle which originates from the post-World War II era. Nevertheless, details of the cities’ administrational systems before that time period are not appearing in these examinations. Only a few studies are dealing with “modern” urban governance from its early beginnings throughout the 19^th century. The foundation of the legal base of the state and its sub-national divisions are originating from the process of democratization which occurred temporarily differently during the past centuries for each country. As the urban governance systems are constantly evolving, it is important to examine the long-term historical background in the form of case studies.

The urban governmental systems of Vienna and Budapest are more than suitable for this purpose because they not only have similar historical background and connections but also because of the administrational complexity of the Austro–Hungarian Monarchy which existed from 1867 to 1918. Even though the process of democratization had begun early after the revolution of 1848 in the Habsburg Empire, soon it took a new turn and ended during the existence of the dual state. The Monarchy had a rather contradictory state administrational structure as the individually functioning Austrian and Hungarian governmental systems existed in a unified state space. The empire’s two capitals, Vienna and Budapest had integrated into this highly complicated administrational system and had their own legal statutes.

The main objective of this paper is to provide a possible method on researching urban governance in a historical perspective, and to give a broader look on to the contemporary theories of urban governance. In this paper, the examination of urban governance’s historical perspective is divided into several components which are mainly related to the administrational divisions of the Austro–Hungarian Monarchy. After presenting the provisional state, municipal laws and their main features, the paper deals with the impacts of the Austro-Hungarian compromise of 1867 on Austria’s and Hungary’s state level governmental systems and their manifestations in sub-national levels. The second aspect of the examination is the integration of Vienna and Budapest into their respective state’s administrational systems and the degree of the state’s and provincial level’s control over decision-making and election systems within these cities. Finally, the paper offers an insight into the capitals’ inner institutional frameworks including their decision-making, as well as legislative and district organizations.

The results of the study show that Vienna’s and Budapest’s inner institutional system was basically similar, however their integration into the state’s administration and their dependencies from higher administrational levels (in decision-making and election system) was entirely different. This leads to a conclusion that if urban governance manifests in very different ways in a particular historical state, then the theory of “urban government” is a much more complex phenomena than the current studies state.