PLANNING FOR A SUSTAINABLE EUROPE? - TU Berlin

342
8.5 EU ISPA Transport Funding for Hungary
8.5.1 The National Context: Hungarian Transport Policy (Post- Transition)
Any scholar researching transport issues in Hungary is quickly enlightened about
several idiosyncracies of the Hungarian infrastructure network. Most importantly,
contrary to the polycentric settlement structure predominant in Poland, Hungary’s urban
system is extremely dominated by Budapest. With 1,8 million inhabitants, Budapest is
clearly Hungary’s primate city. Although two thirds of Hungary’s population is urban,
the majority live in towns of less than 40,000 inhabitants, and only a few secondary cities
approach 100,000 in size. The reasons are of course largely historical. 24 Consequently,
the transport network is extremely centralized, with Budapest functioning as its main
bottleneck for anyone wishing to travel from one end of the country to the other. This is
particularly true for the rail sector. Ninety percent of the entire bridge lane capacity
(including public transport links) across the Danube are located in Budapest, only two
other major crossings exit.
As in many communist countries, serious backlogs in rehabilitation maintenance
were build up during the 1980s when the Hungarian economy went through recession.
Ambitious road building programs were postponed and even basic maintenance was
neglected in the rail sector, whose infrastructure had been extended significantly in
previous decades. Despite the faltering economy, there was already a continuous, albeit
24 During the 19 th century, Hungary was trying to assert its independence from the Austrian empire, and
thus built up Budapest as a strong alternative capital. At this time, Hungary was about three times as large
as it is now, and important secondary cities of the former empire like Bratislava or Zagreb are now located
in neighboring countries. Although the country’s first comprehensive transport infrastructure plan,
developed by Count Szechenyi in 1848 envisaged a comprehensive network that also directly connected
outlying regions though peripheral and lateral connections, this plan was never fully implemented. Instead,
a more radial system concentrating on the capital was developed after the loss of was parts of the country’s
territories after the first World War. After the Second World War, Communist leaders found this radial
infrastructure to be suited to the needs of their centralized economy.