THE IMPACT OF TRANSITION ON AGRICULTURE AND RURAL AREAS IN HUNGARY

  • Aleksandar Jazić, PhD Institute of International Politics and Economics, Belgrade
  • Miloš Jončić, MA Institute of International Politics and Economics, Belgrade

Abstract

In this paper authors are dealing with the link between processes of transition, liberalization, decentralization and influence of these processes in agriculture and rural areas in Hungary. After the collapse of Warsaw Pact, Hungary entered the process of transition. Some important steps that were made in accordance with this process were territorial decentralisation and market liberalization. In parallel with the process of transition also was the process of privatization. It changed the structure of agricultural farms in the sense that they become too weak to survive in the market. Market liberalization has been the especially negative for agriculture and rural areas. However, in the meantime Hungary joined the European Union. It can be expected in the future that Hungary will stabilize the development of agriculture and rural areas if implements measures in accordance with guidelines that are precondition for using European funds intended for this purpose.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

1. Adam, J. (1995): The Transition to a Market Economy in Hungary, Europe-Asia Studies, Vol. 47, No. 6, pp. 989-993.
2. Burger, A. (2009): The Situation of Hungarian Agriculture, Institute of Economics of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Paper Presented at International Scientifc Conference, Vilnius, Lithuania, pp. 2-4.
3. Čavlin, M., Žugić, R., Prebiračević, V. (2017): Karakter planiranja kao funkcija menadžmenta, Oditor, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 102-113.
4. Dingsdale, A. (1999): New Geographies of Post-Socialist Europe, The Geographical Journal, The Changing Meaning of Place in Post-Socialist Eastern Europe: Commodifcation, Perception and Environment, Vol. 165, No. 2, p. 148.
5. European Commission (2015): Factsheet on 2014-2020 Rural Development Programme for Hungary, (available at: http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/sites/agriculture/files/rural-development-2014-2020/country-files/hu/factsheethungary_en.pdf)
6. Eurostat (2012): Agricultural census in Hungary, (available at: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Agricultural_census_in_Hungary)
7. Hamilton, F. E. I. (1999): Transformation and Space in Central and Eastern Europe, The Geographical Journal, The Changing Meaning of Place in PostSocialist Eastern Europe: Commodifcation, Perception and Environment, Vol. 165, No. 2, p. 136.
8. Hare, P., Revesz, T., Aven, P., Oblath, G., Sinn, H-W. (1992): Hungary’s Transition to the Market: The Case against a ‘Big-Bang’, Economic Policy, Vol. 7, No. 14, pp. 245-252.
9. Illner, M. (1998): Territorial Decentralization: An Obstacle to Democratic Reform in Central and Eastern Europe?, in: Jonathan D. Kimball (ed.), The Transfer of Power: Decentralization in Central and Eastern Europe, Local Government and Public Service Reform Initiative, Budapest, p. 17; pp. 22-23.
10. Kolankiewicz, G. (1994): Consensus and Competition in the Eastern Enlargement of the European Union, International Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944-), Vol. 70, No. 3, pp. 483-485.
11. Richter, S. (1996): The Visegrád Group Countries’ Expectations vis-à-vis Western Europe, Russian & East European Finance and Trade, Vol. 32, Issue 1, p. 7.
12. Soos, G. (2002): Local Government Reforms and the Capacity for Local Governance in Hungary, Paper presented at the Joint International Conference Reforming local government: closing the gap between democracy and effciency, organized by the IPSA Research Committee 05 and the DVPW Workgroup Local government studies, Stuttgart, p. 3.
13. Stančetić, V. (2012): Reforma upravljanja u savremenoj državi: razvojni i demokratski potencijali decentralizovane države (ISBN 978-86-519-1239-2), Offcial Gazette, Belgrade, pp. 119-120.
14. The Government of Hungary (2011): „New Hungary” Rural Development Programme 2007-2013, Version 7, Budapest, pp. 113-116.
15. The Visegrad Group (1991): Visegrad Declaration 1991, (available at: http://www.visegradgroup.eu/documents/visegrad-declarations/visegrad-declaration-110412)
16. The Visegrad Group (2017): History of Visegrad Group, (available at: http://www.visegradgroup.eu/about/history)
17. The World Bank (2012): GDP per capita (current US$), (available at: http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD?locations=HU)
18. Udovecz, G., Jozsef, P., Potori, N. (2008): New challenges for Hungarian agriculture, Studies in Agricultural Economics, No. 108. pp. 19-32.
19. United Nations (2017): Sustainable Development Knowledge Platform, Hungary, Documents and Reports 2008/2009, (available at: http://www.un.org/esa/agenda21/natlinfo/countr/hungary/agriculture.pdf)
20. Voszka, E. (1999): Privatization in Hungary: Results and Open Issues, Economic Reform Today, No. 2, pp. 12-15.
Published
2017-09-30
How to Cite
JAZIĆ, Aleksandar; JONČIĆ, Miloš. THE IMPACT OF TRANSITION ON AGRICULTURE AND RURAL AREAS IN HUNGARY. Economics of Agriculture, [S.l.], v. 64, n. 3, p. 1133-1145, sep. 2017. ISSN 2334-8453. Available at: <http://ea.bg.ac.rs/index.php/EA/article/view/78>. Date accessed: 16 nov. 2019. doi: https://doi.org/10.5937/ekoPolj1703133J.